Factors that alter NT-proBNP in heart failure diagnosis 1.0
Research type
Research Study
Full title
The relationship between N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and sex, age, and conduction abnormalities: challenges in heart failure diagnosis.
IRAS ID
338856
Contact name
Cheryl Allardyce
Contact email
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 8 months, 31 days
Research summary
Heart failure is a condition in which the heart is not pumping blood as well as it should. The diagnosis of heart failure can be complicated, as the symptoms can be caused by other conditions. Additionally, the waiting list for echocardiograms, heart scans used to diagnose heart failure, are long. A blood test can also indicate or rule out heart failure. This test measures a protein called BNP in the blood. A high level can indicate heart failure while low levels can rule it out. However, BNP is not only released due to heart failure, but other factors can also increase BNP levels and therefore can make heart failure diagnosis more challenging.
This research is based in one NHS health board, it will first assess if BNP levels are increased by reduced heart function and heart failure, confirming BNP is useful in heart failure diagnosis. The study will check if other factors also increase BNP levels and therefore the accuracy of the test in heart failure diagnosis. BNP levels will be compared in males versus females, across different age groups and compared for those with a normal heart rhythm versus abnormal. This will identify if there are differences in BNP levels between groups and if these factors elevate BNP and could confound heart failure diagnosis.
This study may identify if BNP blood testing could be more accurate in heart failure diagnosis. It could highlight that other factors need to be considered when using BNP levels in heart failure diagnosis, helping to rule this out in patients who may have increased BNP due to other reasons. This could help prioritise urgent patients requiring echocardiograms and help with waiting list issues. Therefore, patient outcomes could be improved if the correct patients are being prioritised and diagnosed, and therefore treated more quickly.REC name
London - Chelsea Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
25/PR/0226
Date of REC Opinion
26 Feb 2025
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion