Abstract
Rationale: The potential role of elevated brain-type natriuretic peptides (BNP) in the differentiation of patients suffering from acute pulmonary embolism at risk for adverse clinical outcome has not been fully established.
Objectives: We evaluated the relation between elevated BNP or N-terminal–pro-BNP (NT–pro-BNP) levels and clinical outcome in patients with pulmonary embolism.
Methods: Articles reporting on studies that evaluated the risk of adverse outcome in patients with pulmonary embolism and elevated BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels were abstracted from Medline and EMBASE. Information on study design, patient and assay characteristics, and clinical outcome was extracted. Primary endpoints were overall mortality and predefined composite outcome of adverse clinical events.
Measurements and Main Results: Data from 13 studies were included. In 51% (576/1,132) of the patients, BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels were increased. The different analyses were performed in subpopulations. Elevated levels of BNP or NT–pro-BNP were significantly associated with right ventricular dysfunction (P < 0.001). Patients with high BNP or NT–pro-BNP concentration were at higher risk of complicated in-hospital course (odds ratio [OR], 6.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.4–10) and 30-day mortality (OR, 7.6; 95% CI, 3.4–17). Patients with a high NT–pro-BNP had a 10% risk of dying (68/671; 95% CI, 8.0–13%), whereas 23% (209/909; 95% CI, 20–26%) had an adverse clinical outcome.
Conclusions: High concentrations of BNP distinguish patients with pulmonary embolism at higher risk of complicated in-hospital course and death from those with low BNP levels. Increased BNP or NT–pro-BNP concentrations alone, however, do not justify more invasive treatment regimens.
The potential role of elevated brain-type natriuretic peptides (BNP) in the differentiation of patients suffering from acute pulmonary embolism at risk for adverse clinical outcome has not yet been fully established.
High BNP or N-terminal–pro-BNP levels distinguish patients with pulmonary embolism at higher risk of adverse events and death. Increased (NT-pro)BNP concentrations alone, however, do not justify more invasive treatment regimens. Normal (NT-pro)BNP levels might be an indication for outpatient treatment.
Several cardiac biomarkers have emerged as indicator of right ventricular dysfunction and predictor of clinical outcome in patients with acute PE. A recent meta-analysis demonstrated that elevated troponin levels identify patients with PE at high risk of short-term death and adverse outcome (4). Also, brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) is a marker of ventricular dysfunction. This hormone is released in response to myocyte stretch. It is synthesized as an inactive prohormone (pro-BNP) that is split into the active hormone BNP and the inactive N-terminal fragment (NT–pro-BNP) (5). Several prospective studies have been performed to identify to potential role of either BNP or NT–pro-BNP in the risk stratification of patients with PE (6–18). However, reported studies have limited patient numbers, used different cutoff points, and involved different clinical endpoints. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of studies in patients with acute PE to evaluate the relation between elevated levels of BNP or NT–pro-BNP and clinical outcome.
A literature search was performed to identify all published prospective studies on BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels and clinical outcome in patients with PE. Medline and EMBASE were searched using predefined search terms between January 1980 and October 2007. Search criteria included “pulmonary embolism” and “pro–brain natriuretic peptide” or “brain natriuretic peptide” or “natriuretic peptide.” Also, by searching the reference lists of all established studies, the researchers aimed to identify additional relevant articles. Articles were not limited to the English language. Only complete articles were applicable for this analysis.
Objectively adjudicated short-term adverse clinical events were used as a primary outcome of this meta-analysis. These included mortality or an adverse clinical outcome defined as the occurrence of any of the following: death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mechanical ventilation, use of vasopressors, thrombolysis, thrombosuction, open surgical embolectomy, or admission to the intensive care unit. Right ventricular dysfunction was used as secondary endpoint.
Two independent researchers (F.A.K. and I.C.M.M.) performed study selection. In case of disagreements, a third researcher (M.V.H.) was consulted. Criteria for selection were as follows: a prospective design, consecutive inclusion, predefined endpoints, clear description of inclusion and exclusion criteria, objective criteria for diagnosis of PE, standardized treatment, and the possibility of creating a 2 × 2 table based on BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels and clinical endpoints. Study sample size was not an eligibility criterion. Objective criteria for PE were as follows: positive computed tomography (CT) findings, high-probability V̇/Q̇ scan, positive pulmonary angiography, or clinical suspicion of PE in combination with ultrasonography-proven deep vein thrombosis. Le Gal and colleagues recently described that a positive compression ultrasonography of the lower limb veins is highly predictive of PE on CT in suspected patients (19). Data regarding patient characteristics, exclusion criteria, diagnostic criteria for PE, severity of PE (inclusion of hemodynamically unstable patients and use of thrombolytic therapy), completeness of follow-up, immunoassay, timing of sampling, cutoff level, follow-up period, and endpoints were abstracted.
Data were entered in Review Manager (version 4.2 for Windows; The Nordic Cochrane Centre, 7 2003, Copenhagen, Denmark). Individual and pooled odds ratios were calculated to assess the relation between elevated BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels and clinical outcome. Mantel-Haenszel methods for combining trials were used for weighting the studies. Cochran's χ2 test and the I2 test for heterogeneity were used to assess interstudy heterogeneity. The χ2 test assesses whether observed differences in results are compatible with chance alone. The I2 describes the percentage of the variability in effect estimates that is due to heterogeneity rather than sampling error. Statistically significant heterogeneity was considered present at χ2 P < 0.10 and I2 > 50%.
As a result of the literature search, 124 studies were found. Articles were excluded by review of title and abstract in case of review articles (n = 48), animal studies (n = 2), case reports (n = 5), editorials, letters or author replies (n = 13), studies not including the clinical course of PE (n = 6), and if the article concerned studies on other diseases than PE (n = 17; Figure 1). After full review, an additional 20 studies were excluded because our predefined endpoints were not reported (17) or no cutoff points were mentioned (3). We identified 13 studies that met our criteria (6–18).
Figure 1. Flow diagram of study selection. BNP = brain-type natriuretic peptide; PE = pulmonary embolism.
[More] [Minimize]Demographic characteristics of the patients were comparable between all included studies (Tables 1 and 2). Mean age of the patients varied between 53 and 75 years; the proportion of females ranged from 36 to 74%. In most patients, the diagnosis of PE was confirmed by CT scan, high-probability V̇/Q̇ scan, or pulmonary angiography. In three studies, hemodynamically unstable patients were excluded (7, 11, 17). Noticeably, in two of these latter studies, some patients received thrombolytic therapy during their hospital stay (7, 11). Two included studies reported on partially overlapping patient cohorts (16, 18). Because one of these studies used BNP (16) and the other NT–pro-BNP (18) levels as an outcome parameter, both studies could be incorporated into subgroup analyses based on type of BNP testing.
Marker | Reference | n | Female (%) | Age (yr)* | Assay† | Timing of Sampling | Cutoff | Follow-up | PE Diagnosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NT–pro-BNP | Maziere (6) | 60 | 60 | 72 ± 15 | Roche, Elecsys 2010 analyzer | Admission | 1,000 pg/ml‡ | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇, pos ultrasonography of lower limbs§ |
| Puls (8) | 107 | 63 | 61 ± 6 | Roche, Elecsys 2010 analyzer | Admission, 4 h, 8 h, 24 h | 1,000 pg/ml | 30 d | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇, pos ultrasonography of lower limbs§ | |
| Binder (12) | 124 | 60 | 60 ± 18 | Roche, Elecsys 2010 analyzer | Admission, 4 h, 8 h, 24 h | 1,000 pg/ml | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇, pos ultrasonography of lower limbs§ | |
| Kostrubiec (13) | 100 | 65 | 63 ± 18 | Roche, ECLIA | Admission | 600 pg/ml | 40 d | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇ | |
| Pruszczyk (15) | 79 | 63 | 63 ± 17 | Roche, Elecsys 2010 analyzer | Admission | 600 pg/ml | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇ | |
| Kucher (18) | 73 | 41 | 61 ± 18 | Roche, Elecsys 2010 analyzer | Admission | 500 pg/ml | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇ | |
| BNP | Logeart (7) | 67 | 41 | 64 ± 17 | Biosite Diagnostics, Triage | Admission | 100 pg/ml | NA‖ | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇ |
| Kline (9) | 181 | 58 | 53 ± 17 | Biosite Diagnostics, Triage | Admission | 90 pg/ml‡ | 6 mo | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇ | |
| Ray (10) | 51 | 65 | 79 ± 9 | Biosite Diagnostics, Triage | Admission | 100 pg/ml | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇, pos pulmonary angiography, pos ultrasonography of lower limbs§ | |
| Pieralli (11) | 61 | 74 | 75 ± 14 | Biosite Diagnostics, Triage | Admission | 89 pg/ml | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, pos pulmonary angiography | |
| Krüger (14) | 46 | 36 | 57 ± 19 | Biosite Diagnostics, Triage | Admission | 90 pg/ml | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇, pos pulmonary angiography, typical clinical presentation and suggestive echocardiography | |
| Kucher (16) | 73 | 41 | 61 ± 18 | Biosite Diagnostics, Triage | Within 4 h | 90 pg/ml‡ | In-hospital stay | Pos CT, high prob V̇/Q̇, pos pulmonary angiography, embolectomy | |
| ten Wolde (17) | 110 | —¶ | 58 ± 18 | Immunoradiometric assay, Shionoria | Admission | 75 pg/ml | 3 mo | Pos CT, high probability V̇/Q̇, non-high probability V̇/Q̇ and pos ultrasonography of lower limbs, pos pulmonary angiography |
Marker | Reference | n | History of Venous Thrombosis, n (%) | Cancer, n (%) | Recent Surgery of Trauma, n (%) | Hypertension, n (%) | COPD, n (%) | Heart Disease, n (%) | Hemodynamic Instability* | Trombolysis (n,%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NT–pro-BNP | Maziere (6) | 60 | 19 (32) | — | — | 27 (45) | 3 (5) | 20 (33) | Yes | 1 (1.7) |
| Puls (8) | 107 | 33 (31) | 20 (19) | 23 (22) | — | — | — | Yes | — | |
| Binder (12) | 124 | 31 (25) | 25 (20) | 39 (30) | — | 19 (15) | — | Yes | 12 (11) | |
| Kostrubiec (13) | 100 | —† | 13 (13) | — | — | 7 (7) | — | Yes | 7 (7.0) | |
| Pruszczyk (15) | 79 | — | — | — | — | — | — | Yes | 8 (10) | |
| Kucher (18) | 73 | — | — | — | 17 (23) | 5 (7) | — | Yes | 10 (14) | |
| BNP | Logeart (7) | 67 | — | — | — | 19 (28) | — | 0 | No | 6 (9.0) |
| Kline (9) | 181 | 29 (15) | 32 (16) | 77 (38) | — | — | — | Yes | 13 (22) | |
| Ray (10) | 51 | 15 (29) | 12 (24) | — | — | 10 (19) | 4 (7.8) | Yes | 0 (0) | |
| Pieralli (11) | 61 | 16 (26) | 10 (16) | 15 (25) | 37 (61) | 6 (10) | 18 (29) | No | 7 (11) | |
| Krüger (14) | 46 | 5 (16) | 4 (13) | 7 (23) | — | — | — | Yes | 22 (48) | |
| Kucher (16) | 73 | — | — | — | 17 (23) | 5 (7) | — | Yes | 6 (8.2) | |
| ten Wolde (17) | 110 | — | 28 (25) | — | — | — | — | No | 0 (0) |
As shown in Table 1, all studies reporting NT–pro-BNP levels used a Roche analyzer (two types: Elecsys 2010 analyzer, Meylan France; electrochemiluminescence method-ECLIA, Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany), with three different cutoff levels, varying from 500 to 1,000 pg/ml. In the BNP studies, two assays with four different cutoff levels varying between 75 and 100 pg/ml were used. In all included studies, the timing of sampling is comparable. Cutoff levels were not predefined in most studies. In these 10 articles, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed to retrospectively determine optimal cutoff values with regard to complicated PE. Normal levels are defined as levels beneath or equal to the cutoff point.
Overall, in 51% (576/1,132) of the patients, the assays showed elevated plasma concentrations of BNP or NT–pro-BNP. Data on overall mortality were reported in four studies using BNP (10, 11, 14, 17) and four studies using NT–pro-BNP (8, 12, 13, 15). In the BNP cohort, 17 of 123 patients (14%[ 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3–21%) with elevated BNP levels died compared with 3 of 138 (2.2%; 95% CI, 0.45–6.2%) of those with normal BNP levels. This resulted in an overall odds ratio (OR) for death of 6.5 (95% CI, 2.0–21; Figure 2). One study had a follow-up of 3 months (17), as compared with the other three, which had in-hospital follow-up. If this single study was left out of the analysis, overall OR decreased to 3.3 (95% CI, 0.6–18). In the NT–pro-BNP cohort, 46 of 250 patients (18%; 95% CI, 14–24%) with elevated NT–pro-BNP levels died in comparison with 2 of 160 (1.3%; 95% CI, 0.15–4.4%) of those with normal NT–pro-BNP levels; OR for death was 8.7 (95% CI, 2.8–27%; Figure 2).
Figure 2. Odds ratio (OR) for overall mortality based on elevated BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels. Different cutoffs were used for different studies; Mantel-Haenszel methods for combining Trials were used for weighting the studies. CI = confidence interval.
[More] [Minimize]Numbers on PE-related mortality were only available in three studies (11, 13, 17). Because follow-up time was dissimilar between these studies and not all mortality cases were adjudicated by an independent, blinded committee to determine the cause of death, we could not use PE-related mortality as an outcome of this analysis.
Ten studies provided data on adverse clinical outcome (6, 8–13, 15, 16, 18) of which six had NT–pro-BNP levels as an outcome parameter (6, 8, 12, 13, 15, 18). Overall, criteria for adverse clinical outcome were comparable throughout all studies. In the BNP study group, 47 of 128 (37%; 95% CI, 28–46%) patients with elevated BNP levels had adverse advents during follow-up in comparison with 28 of 208 (13%; 95% CI, 9.1–19%) patients with normal plasma concentrations. High BNP levels were associated with a higher risk of occurrence of adverse clinical events (OR, 6.3; 95% CI, 3.6–11; Figure 3). This OR was even higher (9.5; 95% CI, 3.5–25) after exclusion of one study with 6 months of follow-up (9), thereby limiting the outcome to in-hospital clinical course. Of the 318 patients with elevated NT–pro-BNP levels, 102 experienced short-term adverse events (32%; 95% CI, 27–38%) as compared with 12 of 225 (5.3%; 95% CI, 2.8–9.1%) patients with normal NT–pro-BNP levels. Patients with high NT–pro-BNP serum concentration were at higher risk of complicated in-hospital course compared with patients with normal levels (OR, 7.5; 95% CI, 3.8–15; Figure 3). Pooled data of all assays showed elevated BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels in 52% of the patients with a risk of 23% (209/909; 95% CI, 20–26%) and an OR of 6.8 (95% CI, 4.4–10) toward complicated clinical course.
Figure 3. Odds ratio (OR) for adverse clinical outcome based on elevated BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels. Different cutoffs were used for different studies; Mantel-Haenszel methods for combining trials were used for weighting the studies. CI = confidence interval.
[More] [Minimize]Data on right ventricular dysfunction were reported in six studies (Figure 4). Four studies were evaluating BNP (243 patients) (7, 11, 14, 16) and two studies evaluated NT–pro-BNP levels (197 patients) (12, 18). The incidence of right ventricular dysfunction was 85% (116 of 137 patients; 95% CI, 78–90%) and 12% (13 of 106 patients; 95% CI, 6.7–20%) in patients with and without elevated BNP levels, respectively (P < 0.0001). A positive association was found between increased concentration of BNP and the presence of right ventricular dysfunction (OR, 81; 95% CI, 27–238). In NT–pro-BNP studies, the incidence of right ventricular dysfunction was 45% (49 of 109 patients; 95% CI, 35–55%) in patients with elevated NT–pro-BNP levels compared with 4.5% (4 of 88 patients; 95% CI, 1.3–11%) in patients with normal NT–pro-BNP levels. Elevated NT–pro-BNP levels were associated with the presence of right ventricular dysfunction (OR, 16.81; 95% CI, 5.73–49.37). Pooled data of all assays revealed a combined OR of 39 (95% CI, 17–89).
Figure 4. Odds ratio (OR) for right ventricular dysfunction on echocardiography based on elevated BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels. Different cutoffs were used for different studies; Mantel-Haenszel methods for combining trials were used for weighting the studies. CI = confidence interval.
[More] [Minimize]This meta-analysis demonstrates a significant relation between high levels of BNP or NT–pro-BNP and deterioration of clinical condition in patients with acute PE. This is physiologically plausible because BNP is released as a reaction to right ventricular stress, which has been shown to predict a nonbenign course in patients with PE (1–3). This relation is also demonstrated in this analysis: we found a very strong correlation between increased levels of BNP or NT–pro-BNP and right ventricular dysfunction on echocardiography (Figure 4).
There are some points for discussion if BNP or NT–pro-BNP levels would be incorporated in clinical treatment strategies for patients with acute PE. First, timing of blood sampling has consequences for the established BNP concentration. The BNP prohormone (pro-BNP) in normal ventricular myocytes is not stored to a significant amount. As a consequence, it takes several hours for the plasma natriuretic peptide levels to increase significantly after the onset of acute myocardial stretch (20). A very recent onset of complaints could therefore result in false-negative BNP or NT–pro-BNP test results. Second, many different cutoff levels for BNP or NT–pro-BNP are proposed in the literature (21, 22). The variation may be related to patient selection, sex, and age (22). Despite the different cutoff levels and different assays, the prognostic value of both NT–pro-BNP and BNP was consistent in all included studies.
What are the potential implications of our findings? First, normal levels of BNP have a high negative predictive value for unfavorable outcome. Patients with normal levels of BNP or NT–pro-BNP have low risks for death as well as for hemodynamic deterioration resulting in any adverse events. Conversely, elevated concentrations of B-type natriuretic peptides are a nonspecific finding. An explanation for this phenomenon is the elevation of natriuretic peptides in a multitude of other conditions, including preexisting left ventricular dysfunction, older age, renal impairment, and chronic lung disease (23). The combination of BNP with other clinical risk factors for adverse outcome may improve sensitivity and positive predictive value for clinical deterioration. Such algorithms for risk stratification would be clinically useful if they were able to identify patients eligible for outpatient management or for standard or intensive in-hospital treatment. Proposals for such algorithms including markers or biomarkers of right ventricular function (e.g., BNP or NT–pro-BNP, troponin [4], or heart-type fatty acid–binding protein [8, 24]) have been made but not yet validated prospectively in clinical outcome studies (12, 13, 25). Future studies are required to determine the clinical benefits of more aggressive treatments in patients with adverse prognosis as identified by these risk stratifications and less intensive treatment, including out of hospital treatment, in patients with normal values of BNP.
This meta-analysis has limitations. First, included studies used different assays with different retrospectively calculated cutoff points. Second, duration of follow-up and definitions of endpoints varied among the studies. In addition, most studies did not mention completeness of follow-up. Nonetheless, we have included a large cohort of prospectively followed patients (n = 1,128) and our analysis showed no evidence of heterogeneity between the outcomes of the incorporated studies. Third, the relative risk for mortality is not adjusted for confounding factors, thus part of the effect ascribed to high BNP values may be related to clinical conditions associated with PE. Fourth, we could not determine the ideal cutoff for the two BNP tests because we did not have the raw data to do ROC curves and other analyses. Finally, in the included studies, it is not stated whether thrombolytic therapy or intensive care unit admission was the result of the clinical condition or a high BNP or NT–pro-BNP value.
In summary, an elevated level of BNP or NT–pro-BNP is a risk factor for short-term mortality and overall short-term complicated clinical outcome, and an indicator of right ventricular dysfunction in patients with acute PE. It remains to be demonstrated whether it could play a role in risk stratification algorithms identifying patients who could benefit from differentiated forms of therapy, of which thrombolytic therapy and home treatment are two poles of the spectrum.
| 1. | Frémont B, Pacouret G, Jacobi D, Puglisi R, Charbonnier B, de Labriolle A. Prognostic value of the echocardiographic right/left ventricular end-diastolic diameter ratio in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: results from a monocenter registry of 1416 patients. Chest 2008;133:358–362. |
| 2. | Grifoni S, Olivotto I, Cecchini P, Pieralli F, Camaiti A, Santoro G, Conti A, Agnelli G, Berni G. Short-term clinical outcome of patients with acute pulmonary embolism, normal blood pressure, and echocardiographic right ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 2000;101:2817–2822. |
| 3. | Goldhaber SZ. Pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 1998;339:93–104. |
| 4. | Becattini C, Vedovati MC, Agnelli G. Prognostic value of troponins in acute pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis. Circulation 2007;116:427–433. |
| 5. | Hall C. Essential biochemistry and physiology of (NT-pro)BNP. Eur J Heart Fail 2004;6:257–260. |
| 6. | Maziere F, Birolleau S, Medimagh S, Arthaud M, Bennaceur M, Riou B, Ray P. Comparison of troponin I and N-terminal-pro B-type natriuretic peptide for risk stratification in patients with pulmonary embolism. Eur J Emerg Med 2007;14:207–211. |
| 7. | Logeart D, Lecuyer L, Thabut G, Tabet JY, Tartiere JM, Chavelas C, Bonnin F, Stievenart JL, Solal AC. Biomarker-based strategy for screening right ventricular dysfunction in patients with non-massive pulmonary embolism. Intensive Care Med 2007;33:286–292. |
| 8. | Puls M, Dellas C, Lankeit M, Olschewski M, Binder L, Geibel A, Reiner C, Schafer K, Hasenfuss G, Konstantinides S. Heart-type fatty acid-binding protein permits early risk stratification of pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J 2007;28:224–229. |
| 9. | Kline JA, Hernandez-Nino J, Rose GA, Norton HJ, Camargo CA Jr. Surrogate markers for adverse outcomes in normotensive patients with pulmonary embolism. Crit Care Med 2006;34:2773–2780. |
| 10. | Ray P, Maziere F, Medimagh S, Lefort Y, Arthaud M, Duguet A, Teixeira A, Riou B. Evaluation of B-type natriuretic peptide to predict complicated pulmonary embolism in patients aged 65 years and older: brief report. Am J Emerg Med 2006;24:603–607. |
| 11. | Pieralli F, Olivotto I, Vanni S, Conti A, Camaiti A, Targioni G, Grifoni S, Berni G. Usefulness of bedside testing for brain natriuretic peptide to identify right ventricular dysfunction and outcome in normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Cardiol 2006;97:1386–1390. |
| 12. | Binder L, Pieske B, Olschewski M, Geibel A, Klostermann B, Reiner C, Konstantinides S. N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide or troponin testing followed by echocardiography for risk stratification of acute pulmonary embolism. Circulation 2005;112:1573–1579. |
| 13. | Kostrubiec M, Pruszczyk P, Bochowicz A, Pacho R, Szulc M, Kaczynska A, Styczynski G, Kuch-Wocial A, Abramczyk P, Bartoszewicz Z, et al. Biomarker-based risk assessment model in acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J 2005;26:2166–2172. |
| 14. | Krüger S, Graf J, Merx MW, Koch KC, Kunz D, Hanrath P, Janssens U. Brain natriuretic peptide predicts right heart failure in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Am Heart J 2004;147:60–65. |
| 15. | Pruszczyk P, Kostrubiec M, Bochowicz A, Styczynski G, Szulc M, Kurzyna M, Fijalkowska A, Kuch-Wocial A, Chlewicka I, Torbicki A. N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Respir J 2003;22:649–653. |
| 16. | Kucher N, Printzen G, Goldhaber SZ. Prognostic role of brain natriuretic peptide in acute pulmonary embolism. Circulation 2003;107:2545–2547. |
| 17. | ten Wolde M, Tulevski II, Mulder JW, Sohne M, Boomsma F, Mulder BJ, Büller HR. Brain natriuretic peptide as a predictor of adverse outcome in patients with pulmonary embolism. Circulation 2003;107:2082–2084. |
| 18. | Kucher N, Printzen G, Doernhoefer T, Windecker S, Meier B, Hess OM. Low pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels predict benign clinical outcome in acute pulmonary embolism. Circulation 2003;107:1576–1578. |
| 19. | Le Gal G, Righini M, Sanchez O, Roy PM, Baba-Ahmed M, Perrier A, Bounameaux H. A positive compression ultrasonography of the lower limb veins is highly predictive of pulmonary embolism on computed tomography in suspected patients. Thromb Haemost 2006;95:963–966. |
| 20. | Hama N, Itoh H, Shirakami G, Nakagawa O, Suga S, Ogawa Y, Masuda I, Nakanishi K, Yoshimasa T, Hashimoto Y, et al. Rapid ventricular induction of brain natriuretic peptide gene expression in experimental acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1995;92:1558–1564. |
| 21. | Maisel AS, Krishnaswamy P, Nowak RM, McCord J, Hollander JE, Duc P, Omland T, Storrow AB, Abraham WT, Wu AH, et al.; Breathing Not Properly Multinational Study Investigators. Rapid measurement of B-type natriuretic peptide in the emergency diagnosis of heart failure. N Engl J Med 2002;347:161–167. |
| 22. | Giannitsis E, Katus HA. Risk stratification in pulmonary embolism based on biomarkers and echocardiography. Circulation 2005;112:1520–1521. |
| 23. | de Lemos JA, McGuire DK, Drazner MH. B-type natriuretic peptide in cardiovascular disease. Lancet 2003;362:316–322. |
| 24. | Lankeit M, Kempf T, Dellas C, Cuny M, Tapken H, Peter T, Olschewski M, Konstantinides S, Wollert KC. Growth-differentiation Factor-15 for Prognostic Assessment of Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008 Feb [Epub ahead of print] |
| 25. | Scridon T, Scridon C, Skali H, Alvarez A, Goldhaber SZ, Solomon SD. Prognostic significance of troponin elevation and right ventricular enlargement in acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Cardiol 2005;96:303–305. |
