Abstract
Background Although there is an ever growing number of adult patients with congenital heart disease (ACHD), many are still afflicted by premature death. Previous reports suggested that natriuretic peptides may identify ACHD patients with adverse outcome. We investigated the prognostic power of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) across the spectrum of ACHD in a large contemporary cohort.
Methods We retrospectively studied 3,392 consecutive and well-characterised ACHD patients under long-term follow-up at a tertiary ACHD centre between 2006-2019. The primary study endpoint was all-cause mortality.
Results A total of 11,974 BNP measurements were analysed. The median BNP at baseline was 47 [24-107] ng/L. During a median follow-up of 8.6 years (29,115 patient-years), 615 (18.1%) patients died. On univariate and multivariate analysis both baseline BNP and temporal changes in BNP levels were predictive of mortality (p<0.001 for both) independent of congenital heart disease diagnosis, complexity, anatomic/haemodynamic features, and/or systolic systemic ventricular function. Patients within the highest quartile of baseline BNP (>107 ng/L) and those within the highest quartile of temporal BNP change (>35 ng/L) had 5.8 and 3.6-fold increased risk of death, respectively.
Conclusion Baseline BNP and temporal BNP changes are both significantly associated with all-cause mortality in ACHD independent of congenital heart disease diagnosis, complexity, anatomic/haemodynamic features, and/or systolic systemic ventricular function. BNP levels represent an easy to obtain and inexpensive marker conveying prognostic information and should be used for the routine surveillance of patients with ACHD.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
no external funding was received
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Institutional Research and Governance Committee at Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK. As this was a retrospective analysis based on data collected for routine clinical care and administrative purposes (UK National Research Ethics Service guidance), individual informed consent was not required.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the first author YY, upon reasonable request.
