Back

Natriuretic Peptides Improve Classification of People at Low Risk of Atrial Fibrillation after Stroke

Cameron, A. C.; Arnold, M.; Katsas, G.; Yang, J.; Quinn, T.; Abdul-Rahim, A. H.; Campbell, R.; Docherty, K.; De Marchis, G. M.; Arnold, M.; Kahles, T.; Nedeltchev, K.; Cereda, C.; Kaegi, G.; Bustamante, A.; Montaner, J.; Ntaios, G.; Foerch, C.; Spanaus, K.; Von Eckardstein, A.; Dawson, J.; Katan, M.

2023-09-29 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2023.09.28.23296282 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundProlonged cardiac monitoring (PCM) increases atrial fibrillation detection after stroke (AFDAS) but access is limited. We aimed to assess the utility of midregional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) to identify people who are unlikely to have AFDAS and improve healthcare resource allocation for PCM.. MethodsWe analysed people from the BIOSIGNAL (Biomarker Signature of Stroke Aetiology) study with ischaemic stroke, no known AF and [&ge;]3 days cardiac monitoring. External validation was in the PRECISE (Preventing Recurrent Cardioembolic Stroke: Right Approach, Right Patient) study of 28-days cardiac monitoring after stroke. The main outcome is no AFDAS. We assessed the discriminatory value of MR-proANP and NT-proBNP combined with clinical variables to identify people with no AFDAS. We determined the net reduction in people who would undergo PCM using the models with 15% AFDAS threshold probability. ResultsWe included 621 people from BIOSIGNAL. The clinical model included age, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, lipid-lowering therapy, creatinine and smoking status. The AUROC was 0.68 (95%CI 0.62-0.74) with clinical variables, which improved with log10MR-proANP (0.72,0.66-0.78;p=0.001) or log10NT-proBNP (0.71,0.65-0.77;p=0.009). Performance was similar for log10MR-proANP versus log10NT-proBNP (p=0.28). In 239 people from PRECISE, the AUROC for clinical variables was 0.68 (0.59-0.76), which improved with log10NT-proBNP (0.73,0.65-0.82;p<0.001) or log10MR-proANP (0.79,0.72-0.86;p<0.001). Performance was better with log10MR-proANP versus log10NT-proBNP (p=0.03). The models could reduce the number who would undergo PCM by 30% (clinical+log10MR-proANP), 27% (clinical+log10NT-proBNP) or 20% (clinical). ConclusionsMR-proANP and NT-proBNP help classify people who are unlikely to have AFDAS and could reduce the number who need PCM by 30%.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.0%
2
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.2%
3
Heart
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
4
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.7%
5
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.7%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 34%
4.2%
7
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.2%
8
The American Journal of Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.9%
9
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.9%
10
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
11
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
12
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.8%
14
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
15
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
16
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
17
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
18
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.7%
19
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.6%
20
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.4%
21
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
22
European Heart Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
23
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
24
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
25
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
26
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
27
Canadian Medical Association Journal
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
28
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
29
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
30
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
14 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%