Use of B-type natriuretic peptide in the management of acute dyspnea in patients with pulmonary disease

What Was Tested

The paper reports a study of BNP (Nesiritide), published as a randomized controlled trial.

In patients with pulmonary disease, it is often challenging to distinguish exacerbated pulmonary disease from congestive heart failure (CHF).

The impact of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) measurements on the management of patients with pulmonary disease and acute dyspnea remains to be defined.

Who Took Part

The abstract describes 226 patients taking part.

PubMed indexes the participants as older adults, both men and women.

This study evaluated the subgroup of 226 patients with a history of pulmonary disease included in the BASEL Study.

Patients were randomly assigned to a diagnostic strategy with (n = 119, BNP group) or without (n = 107, clinical group) the use of BNP levels provided by a rapid bedside assay.

How the Study Was Run

In design terms this was a randomized study.

Random assignment meant chance, not the researchers, decided who got BNP (Nesiritide) and who got the comparison, which limits bias.

Time to discharge and total cost of treatment were recorded as the primary end points.

What Was Measured

The impact of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) measurements on the management of patients with pulmonary disease and acute dyspnea remains to be defined.

The subject headings attached to it are Acute Disease, Asthma, Atrial Natriuretic Factor, Biomarkers, Confidence Intervals, Coronary Artery Disease and Dyspnea.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized study of BNP (Nesiritide) in 226 patients.

Its findings take up roughly 9 sentences of the abstract and are left out here on purpose; the source paper is the place to read them.

The publication is from 2006 (American heart journal), a journal based in United States.

More context: the BNP (Nesiritide) compound page, all human trials.