Abstract
Acute kidney injury is a major complication of cardiovascular surgery. Therapies to reduce or prevent acute kidney injury are highly desirable, and recent advances have helped refine the targets for such therapy, albeit with surprises and controversies. Among these therapies, natriuretic peptides have received the most scrutiny owing to the difficulty in explaining the conflicting evidence for effectiveness in some, but lack thereof, in other studies. This article examines the possible reasons for the conflicting results reported with natriuretic peptides in various clinical conditions.
Financial & competing interests disclosure
A Ahsan Ejaz and Thomas M Beaver are recipients of a research grant from Scios, Inc. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.
No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.