Congestive heart failure (CHF) is a significant clinical challenge that is associated with high morbidity, high mortality, and economic burden. While major advances in lifesaving treatment have been made, our ability to recognize and optimally treat CHF is limited. B-type natriuretic peptide is currently being explored as a marker for left ventricular dysfunction and as a solution to improving diagnostic and therapeutic outcomes. This simple blood test has been shown to be useful in distinguishing CHF from other causes of dyspnea, to have prognostic value, and assist in optimizing medical therapy. The incorporation of B-type natriuretic peptide levels into daily practice is exciting and holds promise in revolutionizing the way we approach CHF.
Measuring a patient’s BNP levels using a simple blood test can help identify left ventricular dysfunction.
Congestive heart failure (CHF) is a significant clinical problem and is a leading cause of hospitalization in North America. Dyspnea, however nebulous, is often the only presenting complaint, and the time to diagnosis of CHF, assessment of severity, and treatment is thus variable. This is concerning as the costs associated with the disease are astounding and we now have treatment options that result in marked symptom relief and improved survival. Currently, the most common approach to diagnosing heart failure includes a history and physical exam, electrocardiography, echocardiography, and radionuclide ventriculography. However, none of these are entirely reliable, reproducible, or realistic for everyday practice. It is not surprising then that there is widespread interest in identifying good markers for CHF, and that one of the natriuretic peptides (NPs) has been brought to the forefront as a promising option.
The NP family consists of three structurally similar but genetically distinct peptides: atrial (or A-type) natriuretic peptide (ANP), brain (or B-type) natriuretic peptide (BNP), and C-type natriuretic peptide (CNP) (Table 1). There are many conditions that are associated with an increase in NPs (Table 2). The final common pathway in the vast majority of these disease states is left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, which results in a process of neurohormonal activation—a response from the sympathetic nervous system, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and the endothelin pathways that can ultimately lead to myocardial apoptosis and fibrosis. [2,3] In contrast, activation of the NP system can play an important role in maintaining the compensated state of CHF through its broad effects at multiple sites in the cardiovascular system (Table 3).[4-5]
Ventricular dysfunction includes both diastolic and systolic dysfunction. Systolic dysfunction refers to an impaired ability to eject blood from the heart, whereas diastolic dysfunction refers to impaired cardiac relaxation, or the inability to fill appropriately with normal systolic function. It is important to remember that the two are not mutually exclusive.
Of the natriuretic peptides, BNP seems to be the most sensitive and specific indicator of ventricular dysfunction.[6-9] PreproBNP is broken down into BNP (a 32-amino-acid peptide) and NT-proBNP and released from myocytes. ANP is less specific for ventricular dysfunction, and can be elevated in hypertension, stress, or exercise situations. In contrast, BNP levels have been demonstrated to correlate with LV function [9,10] left ventricular end diastolic pressures,  and New York Heart Association classification. [7,12] Given the above, clinical studies have focused on plasma BNP concentrations.
There are two different assays for BNP and both are easy to perform with results available in a reasonable time frame. The first is a point-of-care test, which measures BNP directly and provides results in 15 minutes. This test is reflective of current ventricular status as it measures BNP, a biologically active peptide that has a half-life of 18 minutes. The second assay is an immunometric assay that measures NT-proBNP, a biologically inactive molecule that has a half-life of 1 hour and has a longer invitro stability. Results of NT-proBNP studies show that it is comparable to BNP for detection of LV dysfunction. BNP and NT-proBNP values are highly correlative (r = 0.88).[13-14]
In terms of cost, the Biosite point-of-care BNP assay is $33 per assay. The cost of the Roche NT-ProBNP assay is not currently listed.
There have been many studies that have recognized BNP as a useful marker for CHF in primary care settings.[15-20] For example, a study of 122 consecutive patients with suspected new CHF found that a BNP level of 76 pg/mL has a negative predictive value of 98%, specificity of 84%, and a sensitivity of 97% for diagnosing CHF. Point-of-care testing of BNP in the emergency department setting has also been shown to differentiate between pulmonary and cardiac causes of dyspnea. Maisel and colleagues studied 1586 patients presenting to the emergency department with acute dyspnea. In this study, a cut-off BNP level of 100 pg/mL was recommended with a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 76%, and an accuracy of 83% in distinguishing CHF from other causes of dyspnea. This was more accurate than both the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey criteria (67%) and the Framingham criteria (73%). In multivariate analysis, BNP was the strongest independent predictor of CHF, with an odds ratio of 29.60. The study concluded that the use of BNP in conjunction with clinical information is useful in diagnosing and excluding CHF from the diagnosis when patients present to an emergency setting with dyspnea.
Finally, elevated BNP levels also have a relationship with diastolic filling abnormalities on echocardiogram, reinforcing the diagnosis of diastolic dysfunction.[21-23] Redfield and colleagues studied 657 patients with normal systolic function and found that BNP levels were higher in those with isolated diastolic dysfunction. BNP alone cannot differentiate between diastolic and systolic dysfunction, but is strongly predictive in combination with clinical CHF and normal LV function.
Current practice for treating heart failure involves institution of therapy and titration of medications to target doses for symptomatic improvement. However, there is no optimal way to evaluate therapeutic efficacy on a neurohormonal or hemodynamic level. BNP not only reflects neurohormonal status, but correlates with a change in pulmonary artery wedge pressure, which is an independent predictor of mortality and morbidity in CHF. This was demonstrated by a pilot study of 20 patients, which showed a significant correlation between percentage change in wedge pressure from baseline per hour and a concomitant percentage change of BNP from baseline (r = 0.73, P < .05).
Troughton and colleagues studied 69 patients and randomly assigned them to treatment guided by either NT-proBNP levels or clinical assessment in an outpatient setting. In the NT-proBNP-guided therapy group, NT-proBNP levels fell 79 pmol/L below baseline at 6 months, as compared with 3 pmol/L in the clinically guided group. Patients in the NT-proBNP-guided therapy group had a decreased incidence of the primary composite endpoint: cardiovascular death, readmission, or new episodes of decompensated heart failure (P = .01). Other studies have also shown that titration of CHF therapy to BNP levels results in sustained symptomatic improvement and a decrease in hospital readmission rates and cardiac mortality.[26-28] For example, Cheng and colleagues studied 72 patients with decompensated CHF requiring hospital admission and showed that an increase in BNP during treatment was a strong predictor of mortality and early hospital readmission.
It is clear that optimal treatment of CHF should go beyond symptom control and blind titration of medications to study target doses. Serial measurements of BNP would be useful in determining the proper dosage of CHF drugs and for monitoring the success of therapy.
A large amount of data supports extending the use of BNP from a diagnostic marker to a prognostic marker. Harrison and colleagues looked at BNP levels in 325 patients presenting to the emergency department with dyspnea and determined that the admission BNP levels were highly predictive of cardiac events over the next 6 months. Patients with BNP levels greater than 480 pg/mL had a 51% 6-month cumulative probability of a CHF event. BNP has also been shown to be a powerful predictor of functional status deterioration. More recently, Berger and colleagues studied 452 patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than or equal to 35%, and multivariate analyses found BNP to be the strongest independent predictor of sudden death. This has been demonstrated in other studies as well.
BNP has also been looked at as a prognostic marker in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). De Lemos and colleagues measured BNP levels 40 ± 20 hours after the onset of acute ischemia in 2525 patients with ACS in the TIMI 16 study. Baseline BNP levels were correlated with the risk of death, heart failure, and myocardial infarction at 30 days and 10 months.
Sabatine and colleagues found that elevations in troponin, creatine-reactive protein (CRP), and BNP were each an independent predictor of the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or CHF. Troponin and CRP are also unique markers and reflect myocardial injury and inflammation, respectively.
BNP may eventually have a role as a treatment agent, given that short-term infusions of ANP and BNP in CHF patients have shown beneficial effects in improving central hemodynamics and increasing stroke volume.[4,34,35] However, there has been little success with orally active analogues of NPs. Therefore, more focus has been on investigating neutral-endopeptidase (NEP) inhibitors in the hopes that they will improve the morbidity and mortality associated with CHF.[36,37] NEP degradation is one mechanism by which NPs are cleared. The NEP inhibitors have been shown to heighten NP levels and reduce the proportion of angiotensin II.
Recently, the OVERTURE trial randomly assigned 557 patients with severe CHF, already optimized on standard heart failure treatment, to enalapril or omapatrilat (a combination ACE inhibitor and NEP inhibitor). Mortality and CHF/MI hospitalizations were equivalent in both groups but there was a higher incidence of dizziness, angioedema, and hypotension in the omapatrilat group. The benefit of treatment with NPs or a NEP inhibitor is currently not well established. Further work is needed in this area before any definitive treatment can be put into practice.
BNP may also eventually have a role as a screening tool, given the nature of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), which is present in up to 3% of individuals over the age of 65. Because up to 50% of these patients are asymptomatic, current CHF consensus is to treat all symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with an LVEF less than 40%. The data for this were derived mainly from the original Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD), showing that treatment with enalapril in asymptomatic LVSD (prevention arm) decreased the composite endpoint of mortality or development of CHF, and in symptomatic LVSD (treatment arm) decreased mortality at 4-year follow-up. A 12-year follow-up of the original SOLVD study (XSOLVD, presented at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2002), demonstrated a 6% reduction in mortality in the enalapril group (P < .001). Mortality benefits were demonstrated in both prevention and treatment arms.
Many studies have looked at the relationship between LVSD and BNP. A large community-based prospective cohort of 3177 patients from the Framingham study specifically addressed this issue and looked at BNP and NT-ANP for detection of elevated LV mass and LVSD. Discrimination limits based on high specificity (0.95) only identified less than one-third of patients who had elevated LV mass or LVSD, suggesting limited usefulness of NPs as mass screening tools. Currently, the use of BNP as a screening tool for asymptomatic LVSD in the community is not recommended.
BNP levels that accurately reflect a patient’s neurohormonal and hemodynamic status can be attained by a simple blood test. Even though the role of BNP as a treatment agent and screening tool for asymptomatic LVSD is unclear at this time, a vast amount of data supports its use in differentiating dyspnea in both outpatient and urgent care settings, predicting symptomatic LV dysfunction (both systolic and diastolic), tailoring and optimizing CHF treatment, and evaluating prognosis in both CHF and ACS. Widespread use of BNP measurements is sure to facilitate rapid diagnosis and prompt treatment of CHF, and has the potential to reduce patient morbidity and mortality by guiding optimal treatment of CHF and accurate assessment of CHF prognosis. With these benefits in mind, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society has included a reference to BNP in its 2003 practice guideline (available at www.ccs.ca under CSS 2003 Consensus HF Update, pg. 12-13). A clinical tip advises that the measurement of BNP levels serves as an adjunct to a thorough clinical assessment when the etiology of dyspnea remains unclear (Grade A: Level 1 evidence). And in accordance with this clinical tip, the BC Congestive Heart Failure Advisory Committee has proposed a guideline for care that includes the use of BNP in a diagnostic algorithm.
|Peptides||Primary origin||Stimulus of release|
|ANP||Cardiac atrium||Atrial distension|
|BNP||Ventricular myocardium||Ventricular overload|
|• Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH)
• Inflammatory cardiac disease
• Pulmonary hypertension
• Acute or chronic renal failure
• Endocrine disease (e.g., primary hyperaldosteronism)
• Paraneoplastic disease (e.g., small-cell lung cancer)
• Decrease in peripheral vascular resistance
• Decrease in activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system
• Decrease in sympathetic nervous system activity
1. Francis GS, Goldsmith SR, Levine TB, et al. The neurohormonal axis in congestive heart failure. Ann Intern Med 1984;101:370-377. PubMed Abstract
2. Rouleau JL. The neurohormonal hypothesis and the treatment of heart failure. Can J Cardiol 1996;12(suppl F):3-8.
3. Remes J, Tikkanen I, Fyhrquist F, et al. Neuroendocrine activity in untreated heart failure. Br Heart J 1991;65:249-255. PubMed Abstract
4. Yoshimura M, Yasue H, Morita E, et al. Hemodynamic, renal, and hormonal responses to brain natriuretic peptide infusion in patients with congestive heart failure. Circulation 1991;84:1581-1588. PubMed Abstract
5. Naruse M, Takeyama Y, Tanabe A, et al. Atrial and brain natriuretic peptides in cardiovascular diseases. Hypertension 1994;23(suppl I):231-234. PubMed Abstract
6. Nagagawa O, Ogawa Y, Itoh H, et al. Rapid transcriptional activation and early mRNA turnover of BNP in cardiocyte hypertrophy: Evidence for BNP as an “emergency” cardiac hormone against ventricular overload. J Clin Invest 1995;96:1280-1287. PubMed Abstract
7. Tsutamoto T, Wada A, Maeda K, et al. Attenuation of compensation of endogenous cardiac natriuretic peptide system in chronic heart failure: Prognostic role of plasma brain natriuretic peptide concentration in patients with chronic symptomatic left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 1997;96:509-516. PubMed Abstract Full Text
8. Choy AM, Darbar D, Lang CC, et al. Detection of left ventricular dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction: Comparison of clinical, echocardiographic, and neurohormonal methods. Br Heart J 1994;72:16-22. PubMed Abstract
9. McDonagh TA, Robb SD, Murdoch DR, et al. Biochemical detection of left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Lancet 1998;351:9-13. PubMed Abstract Full Text
10. Maisel AS, Koon J, Krishnaswamy P, et al. Utility of B-natriuretic peptide as a rapid, point-of-care test for screening patients undergoing echocardiography to determine left ventricular dysfunction. Am Heart J 2001;141:367-374. PubMed Abstract Full Text
11. Maeda K, Takayoshi T, Wada A, et al. Plasma brain natriuretic peptide as a biochemical marker of high left ventricular end-diastolic pressure in patients with symptomatic left ventricular dysfunction. Am Heart J 1998;135:825-832. PubMed Abstract Full Text
12. Clerico A, Iervasi G, Del Chicca M, et al. Circulating levels of cardiac natriuretic peptides measured by highly sensitive and specific immunoradiometric assays in normal subjects and in patients with different degrees of heart failure. J Endocrinol Invest 1998;21:170-179. PubMed Abstract
13. Hunt PJ, Richards AM, Nicholls MG, et al. Immunoreactive amino-terminal pro-brain Natriuretic peptide: A new marker of cardiac impairment. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 1997;47:287-296. PubMed Abstract
14. Talwar S, Squire B, Davies JE, et al. Plasma N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and ECG in the assessment of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in high risk population. Eur Heart J 1999;20:1736-1744. PubMed Abstract Full Text
15. Cowie MR, Struthers AD, Wood DA, et al. Value of natriuretic peptides in assessment of patients with possible new heart failure in primary care. Lancet 1997;350:1349-1353. PubMed Abstract Full Text
16. Maisel AS, Krishnaswamy P, Nowak RM, et al. Rapid measurement of B-type natriuretic peptide in the emergency diagnosis of heart failure. N Engl J Med 2002;347:161-167. PubMed Abstract Full Text
17. Morrison KL, Harrison A, Krishnaswamy P. Utility of a rapid B-natriuretic peptide assay in differentiating congestive heart failure from lung disease in patients presenting with dyspnea. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:202-209. PubMed Abstract Full Text
18. Dao Q, Krishnaswamy P, Kazanegra R, et al. Utility of B-type natriuretic peptide in the diagnosis of congestive heart failure in an urgent-care setting. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:379-385. PubMed Abstract Full Text
19. Yoshimura M, Yasue H, Okamura K, et al. Different secretion pattern of atrial natriuretic peptide and brain natriuretic peptide in patients with congestive heart failure. Circulation 1993;87:464-469. PubMed Abstract
20. Hirata Y, Matsumoto A, Aoyag T, et al. Measurement of plasma brain natriuretic peptide level as a guide for cardiac overload. Cardiovasc Res 2001;51: 585-591. PubMed Abstract Full Text
21. Redfield MR, Tikkanen I, Fyhrquist F, et al. Isolated diastolic dysfunction in the community. Circulation (suppl I) 1999;I-381.
22. Lubien E, DeMaria A, Krishnaswamy P, et al. Utility of B-natriuretic peptide in detecting diastolic dysfunction: Comparison with doppler velocity recordings. Circulation 2002;105:595-601. PubMed Abstract Full Text
23. Krishnaswamy P, Lubien E, Clopton P, et al. Utility of B-natriuretic peptide levels in identifying patients with left ventricular systolic or diastolic dysfunction. Am J Med 2001;111:274-279. PubMed Abstract Full Text
24. Kazanegra R, Cheng V, Garcia A, et al. A rapid test for B-type natriuretic peptide correlates with falling wedge pressures in patients treated for decompensated heart failure: A pilot study. J Card Fail 2001;7:21-29. PubMed Abstract Full Text
25. Troughton RW, Frampton CM, Yandle TG, et al. Treatment of heart failure guided by plasma amino terminal brain natriuretic peptide concentrations. Lancet 2000;355:1126-1130. PubMed Abstract Full Text
26. Maeda K, Tsutamoto T, Wada A, et al. High levels of plasma brain natriuretic peptide and interleukin-6 after optimized treatment for heart failure are independent risk factors for morbidity and mortality in patients with congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:1587-1593. PubMed Abstract Full Text
27. Richards AM, Doughty R, Nicholls MG, et al, for the Australian-New Zealand Heart Failure Group. Neurohormonal prediction of benefit from carvedilol in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 1999;99:786-792. PubMed Abstract Full Text
28. Koglin J, Pehlivanli S, Schwaiblmair M, et al. Role of brain natriuretic peptide in risk stratification of patients with congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:1934-1941. PubMed Abstract Full Text
29. Cheng V, Kazanagra R, Garcia A, et al. A rapid bedside test for B-type peptide predicts treatment outcome in patients admitted for decompensated heart failure: A pilot study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37: 386-391. PubMed Abstract Full Text
30. Harrison A, Morrison K, Krishnaswamy P, et al. B-type natriuretic peptide predicts future cardiac events in patients presenting to the emergency department with dyspnea. Ann Emerg Med 2002;39: 131-138. PubMed Abstract Full Text
31. Berger R, Huelsman M, Strecker K, et al. B-type natriuretic peptide predicts sudden death in patients with chronic heart failure. Circulation 2002;105:2392-2397. PubMed Abstract Full Text
32. De Lemos JA, Morrow DA, Bentley JH, et al. The prognostic value of B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1014-1021. PubMed Abstract Full Text
33. Sabatine MS, Morrow DA, De Lemos JA, et al. Multimarker approach to risk stratification in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes. Circulation 2002;105:1760-1763. PubMed Abstract Full Text
34. Okumura K, Ysue H, Fujii H, et al. Effects of BNP on coronary artery diameter and coronary hemodynamic variables in humans: Comparison with effects on systemic hemodynamic variables. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995;25:342-348. PubMed Abstract Full Text
35. Clarkson PBM, Wheeldon NM, MacFayden RJ, et al. Effects of brain natriuretic peptide on exercise hemodynamics and neurohormones in isolated diastolic heart failure. Circulation 1996;93:2037-2042. PubMed Abstract Full Text
36. Packer M, Califf RM, Konstam MA, et al. Comparison of omapatrilat and enalapril in patients with chronic heart failure: The Omapatrilat Versus Enalapril Randomized Trial of Utility in Reducing Events (OVERTURE). Circulation 2002;106:920-926. PubMed Abstract Full Text
37. Rouleau JL, Pfeffer MA, Stewart DJ, et al. Comparison of vasopeptidase inhibitor, omapatrilat, and lisinopril on exercise tolerance and morbidity in patients with heart failure: IMPRESS randomized trial. Lancet 2000;356:615-620. PubMed Abstract Full Text
38. Burnett JC. Vasopeptidase inhibition: A new concept in blood pressure management. J Hypertens Suppl 1999;17:S37-S43. PubMed Abstract
39. McDonagh TA, Morrison CE, Lawrence A, et al. Symptomatic and asymptomatic left-ventricular systolic dysfunction in an urban population. Lancet 1997;350:829-833. PubMed Abstract Full Text
40. American Journal of Cardiology/Advisory Council to Improve Outcomes Nationwide in Heart Failure. Consensus recommendations for the management of chronic heart failure. Circulation 1996;94:2807-2816.
41. The SOLVD Investigators. Effect of enalapril on mortality and the development of heart failure in asymptomatic patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1991;325:293-302.
42. Vasan AS, Benjamin EJ, Larson MG, et al. Plasma natriuretic peptides for the community screening for left ventricular hypertrophy and systolic dysfunction. The Framingham Heart Study. JAMA 2002;288:1252-1259. PubMed Abstract Full Text
43. Diagnostic algorithm proposed by the Guidelines and Protocols Advisory Committee under the auspices of the British Columbia Medical Association, the Medical Services Commission, and the government of British Columbia. Note that the algorithm has not been approved by the Medical Services Commission at the time of publication.
Jasmine Grewal, MD, Mann Chandavimol, MD, FRCPC, and Andrew Ignaszewski, MD, FRCPC
Dr Grewal is a third-year resident in internal medicine at the University of British Columbia. Dr Chandavimol is co-chief cardiology resident at UBC. Dr Ignaszewski is an associate professor in the Division of Cardiology at UBC and the Healthy Heart Program at St. Paul’s Hospital.
Above is the information needed to cite this article in your paper or presentation. The International Committee
of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends the following citation style, which is the now nearly universally
accepted citation style for scientific papers:
Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL, Marion DW, Palmer AM, Schiding JK, et al. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:284-7.
About the ICMJE and citation styles
The ICMJE is small group of editors of general medical journals who first met informally in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 1978 to establish guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to their journals. The group became known as the Vancouver Group. Its requirements for manuscripts, including formats for bibliographic references developed by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), were first published in 1979. The Vancouver Group expanded and evolved into the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which meets annually. The ICMJE created the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals to help authors and editors create and distribute accurate, clear, easily accessible reports of biomedical studies.
An alternate version of ICMJE style is to additionally list the month an issue number, but since most journals use continuous pagination, the shorter form provides sufficient information to locate the reference. The NLM now lists all authors.
BCMJ standard citation style is a slight modification of the ICMJE/NLM style, as follows:
- Only the first three authors are listed, followed by "et al."
- There is no period after the journal name.
- Page numbers are not abbreviated.
For more information on the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, visit www.icmje.org