Background Heart failure （HF） is a common disease with complex pathophysiological causes. The diagnosis of HF commonly relies on comprehensive analyses of medical history and symptoms, and results from echocardiogra...Background Heart failure （HF） is a common disease with complex pathophysiological causes. The diagnosis of HF commonly relies on comprehensive analyses of medical history and symptoms, and results from echocardiography and biochemical tests. Galectin-3, a rela-tively new biomarker in HF, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2010 as a marker in the stratification of risk for HF. We assessed galectin-3 as a biomarker for HF diagnosis in patients with preserved ejection fraction （pEF） and compared its performance with that of B-type natriuretic peptide （BNP）. Methods Thirty-five pEF patients with HF （HFpEF group） and 43 pEF patients without HF （control group） were enrolled. Plasma levels of galectin-3 and BNP in HFpEF and control subjects were determined. Sensitivity, specificity, pre dictive values, and accuracy of galectin-3 and BNP as markers for HF diagnosis were calculated and compared. Results Levels of galec- tin-3 and BNP were 23.09 ±6.97 ng/mL and 270.46 ± 330.41 pg/mL in the HFpEF group, and 16.74 ± 2.75 ng/mL and 59.94 ± 29.93 pg/mL in the control group, respectively. Differences in levels of galectin-3 and BNP between the two groups were significant （P 〈 0.01）. As a bio- marker for HF diagnosis in study subjects, galectin-3 showed sensitivity and specificity of 94.3% and 65.1%, respectively, at a cutoff value of 17.8 ug/mL. BNP showed sensitivity and specificity of 77.1% and 90.7%, respectively, at a cutoff value of 100 pg/mL. Galectin-3 was a significantly more sensitive （P 〈 0.05） but less specific （P 〈 0.01） biomarker compared with BNP. Differences in positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy between galectin-3 and BNP markers were not significant （P 〉 0.05）. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve （95% confidence interval） were 0.891 （0.808-0.974） and 0.896 （0.809-0.984） for galectin-3 and BNP, respec- tively, with no significant difference between the two values （P 〉 0.05）. Co展开更多
文摘Background Heart failure （HF） is a common disease with complex pathophysiological causes. The diagnosis of HF commonly relies on comprehensive analyses of medical history and symptoms, and results from echocardiography and biochemical tests. Galectin-3, a rela-tively new biomarker in HF, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2010 as a marker in the stratification of risk for HF. We assessed galectin-3 as a biomarker for HF diagnosis in patients with preserved ejection fraction （pEF） and compared its performance with that of B-type natriuretic peptide （BNP）. Methods Thirty-five pEF patients with HF （HFpEF group） and 43 pEF patients without HF （control group） were enrolled. Plasma levels of galectin-3 and BNP in HFpEF and control subjects were determined. Sensitivity, specificity, pre dictive values, and accuracy of galectin-3 and BNP as markers for HF diagnosis were calculated and compared. Results Levels of galec- tin-3 and BNP were 23.09 ±6.97 ng/mL and 270.46 ± 330.41 pg/mL in the HFpEF group, and 16.74 ± 2.75 ng/mL and 59.94 ± 29.93 pg/mL in the control group, respectively. Differences in levels of galectin-3 and BNP between the two groups were significant （P 〈 0.01）. As a bio- marker for HF diagnosis in study subjects, galectin-3 showed sensitivity and specificity of 94.3% and 65.1%, respectively, at a cutoff value of 17.8 ug/mL. BNP showed sensitivity and specificity of 77.1% and 90.7%, respectively, at a cutoff value of 100 pg/mL. Galectin-3 was a significantly more sensitive （P 〈 0.05） but less specific （P 〈 0.01） biomarker compared with BNP. Differences in positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy between galectin-3 and BNP markers were not significant （P 〉 0.05）. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve （95% confidence interval） were 0.891 （0.808-0.974） and 0.896 （0.809-0.984） for galectin-3 and BNP, respec- tively, with no significant difference between the two values （P 〉 0.05）. Co
