Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction

Koen W. Streng; Hans L. Hillege; Jozine M. Ter Maaten; Dirk J. van Veldhuisen; Kenneth Dickstein; Nilesh J. Samani; Leong L. Ng; Marco Metra; Gerasimos S. Filippatos; Piotr Ponikowski; Faiez Zannad; Stefan D. Anker; Peter van der Meer; Chim C. Lang; Adriaan A. Voors; Kevin Damman

doi:10.1007/s12265-023-10356-y

Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction

Koen W. Streng, Hans L. Hillege, Jozine M. Ter Maaten, Dirk J. van Veldhuisen, Kenneth Dickstein, Nilesh J. Samani, Leong L. Ng, Marco Metra, Gerasimos S. Filippatos, Piotr Ponikowski, Faiez Zannad, Stefan D. Anker, Peter van der Meer, Chim C. Lang, Adriaan A. Voors (Lead / Corresponding author), Kevin Damman

Molecular and Clinical Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Recent data suggest different causes of renal dysfunction between heart failure with reduced (HFrEF) versus preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We therefore studied a wide range of urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments in heart failure patients.

Methods: In 2070, in chronic heart failure patients, we measured several established and upcoming urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments.

Results: Mean age was 70 ± 12 years, 74% was male and 81% (n = 1677) had HFrEF. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in patients with HFpEF (56 ± 23 versus 63 ± 23 ml/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.001). Patients with HFpEF had significantly higher values of NGAL (58.1 [24.0-124.8] versus 28.1 [14.6-66.9] μg/gCr, P < 0.001) and KIM-1 (2.28 [1.49-4.37] versus 1.79 [0.85-3.49] μg/gCr, P = 0.001). These differences were more pronounced in patients with an eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73m2.

Conclusions: HFpEF patients showed more evidence of tubular damage and/or dysfunction compared with HFrEF patients, in particular when glomerular function was preserved.

Original language	English
Number of pages	10
Journal	Journal of cardiovascular translational research
Early online date	16 Feb 2023
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s12265-023-10356-y
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 16 Feb 2023

Keywords

Heart failure
Renal function
Urinary markers
Proximal tubule

Access to Document

10.1007/s12265-023-10356-yLicence: CC BY

Final Published VersionFinal published version, 1.03 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Streng, K. W., Hillege, H. L., Ter Maaten, J. M., van Veldhuisen, D. J., Dickstein, K., Samani, N. J., Ng, L. L., Metra, M., Filippatos, G. S., Ponikowski, P., Zannad, F., Anker, S. D., van der Meer, P., Lang, C. C., Voors, A. A., & Damman, K. (2023). Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction. Journal of cardiovascular translational research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12265-023-10356-y

@article{dadad3d9501742fba52ca46541db866c,

title = "Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction",

abstract = "Background: Recent data suggest different causes of renal dysfunction between heart failure with reduced (HFrEF) versus preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We therefore studied a wide range of urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments in heart failure patients.Methods: In 2070, in chronic heart failure patients, we measured several established and upcoming urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments.Results: Mean age was 70 ± 12 years, 74% was male and 81% (n = 1677) had HFrEF. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in patients with HFpEF (56 ± 23 versus 63 ± 23 ml/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.001). Patients with HFpEF had significantly higher values of NGAL (58.1 [24.0-124.8] versus 28.1 [14.6-66.9] μg/gCr, P < 0.001) and KIM-1 (2.28 [1.49-4.37] versus 1.79 [0.85-3.49] μg/gCr, P = 0.001). These differences were more pronounced in patients with an eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73m2.Conclusions: HFpEF patients showed more evidence of tubular damage and/or dysfunction compared with HFrEF patients, in particular when glomerular function was preserved.",

keywords = "Heart failure, Renal function, Urinary markers, Proximal tubule",

author = "Streng, {Koen W.} and Hillege, {Hans L.} and {Ter Maaten}, {Jozine M.} and {van Veldhuisen}, {Dirk J.} and Kenneth Dickstein and Samani, {Nilesh J.} and Ng, {Leong L.} and Marco Metra and Filippatos, {Gerasimos S.} and Piotr Ponikowski and Faiez Zannad and Anker, {Stefan D.} and {van der Meer}, Peter and Lang, {Chim C.} and Voors, {Adriaan A.} and Kevin Damman",

note = "Funding Information: This work was supported by the Netherlands Cardiovascular Research Initiative: an initiative with support of the Dutch Heart Foundation [CVON2014-11 RECONNECT] and a grant from the European Commission [FP7-242209-BIOSTAT-CHF]. Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023. The Author(s).",

year = "2023",

month = feb,

day = "16",

doi = "10.1007/s12265-023-10356-y",

language = "English",

}

Streng, KW, Hillege, HL, Ter Maaten, JM, van Veldhuisen, DJ, Dickstein, K, Samani, NJ, Ng, LL, Metra, M, Filippatos, GS, Ponikowski, P, Zannad, F, Anker, SD, van der Meer, P, Lang, CC, Voors, AA & Damman, K 2023, 'Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction', Journal of cardiovascular translational research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12265-023-10356-y

TY - JOUR

T1 - Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction

AU - Streng, Koen W.

AU - Hillege, Hans L.

AU - Ter Maaten, Jozine M.

AU - van Veldhuisen, Dirk J.

AU - Dickstein, Kenneth

AU - Samani, Nilesh J.

AU - Ng, Leong L.

AU - Metra, Marco

AU - Filippatos, Gerasimos S.

AU - Ponikowski, Piotr

AU - Zannad, Faiez

AU - Anker, Stefan D.

AU - van der Meer, Peter

AU - Lang, Chim C.

AU - Voors, Adriaan A.

AU - Damman, Kevin

N1 - Funding Information: This work was supported by the Netherlands Cardiovascular Research Initiative: an initiative with support of the Dutch Heart Foundation [CVON2014-11 RECONNECT] and a grant from the European Commission [FP7-242209-BIOSTAT-CHF]. Copyright: © 2023. The Author(s).

PY - 2023/2/16

Y1 - 2023/2/16

N2 - Background: Recent data suggest different causes of renal dysfunction between heart failure with reduced (HFrEF) versus preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We therefore studied a wide range of urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments in heart failure patients.Methods: In 2070, in chronic heart failure patients, we measured several established and upcoming urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments.Results: Mean age was 70 ± 12 years, 74% was male and 81% (n = 1677) had HFrEF. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in patients with HFpEF (56 ± 23 versus 63 ± 23 ml/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.001). Patients with HFpEF had significantly higher values of NGAL (58.1 [24.0-124.8] versus 28.1 [14.6-66.9] μg/gCr, P < 0.001) and KIM-1 (2.28 [1.49-4.37] versus 1.79 [0.85-3.49] μg/gCr, P = 0.001). These differences were more pronounced in patients with an eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73m2.Conclusions: HFpEF patients showed more evidence of tubular damage and/or dysfunction compared with HFrEF patients, in particular when glomerular function was preserved.

AB - Background: Recent data suggest different causes of renal dysfunction between heart failure with reduced (HFrEF) versus preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We therefore studied a wide range of urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments in heart failure patients.Methods: In 2070, in chronic heart failure patients, we measured several established and upcoming urinary markers reflecting different nephron segments.Results: Mean age was 70 ± 12 years, 74% was male and 81% (n = 1677) had HFrEF. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower in patients with HFpEF (56 ± 23 versus 63 ± 23 ml/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.001). Patients with HFpEF had significantly higher values of NGAL (58.1 [24.0-124.8] versus 28.1 [14.6-66.9] μg/gCr, P < 0.001) and KIM-1 (2.28 [1.49-4.37] versus 1.79 [0.85-3.49] μg/gCr, P = 0.001). These differences were more pronounced in patients with an eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73m2.Conclusions: HFpEF patients showed more evidence of tubular damage and/or dysfunction compared with HFrEF patients, in particular when glomerular function was preserved.

KW - Heart failure

KW - Renal function

KW - Urinary markers

KW - Proximal tubule

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85148049570&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12265-023-10356-y

DO - 10.1007/s12265-023-10356-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 36795286

ER -

Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Aref#d: 21596. BIOSTAT-CHF: A Systems Biology Study to Tailored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure

Cite this

Urinary Marker Profiles in Heart Failure with Reduced Versus Preserved Ejection Fraction

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Projects

Aref#d: 21596. BIOSTAT-CHF: A Systems Biology Study to Tailored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure

Cite this