BACKGROUND: Systemic sclerosis–associated pulmonary artery hypertension (SScPAH) has a worse prognosis compared with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH), with a median survival of 3 years after diagnosis often caused by right ventricular (RV) failure. We tested whether SScPAH or systemic sclerosis–related pulmonary hypertension with interstitial lung disease imposes a greater pulmonary vascular load than IPAH and leads to worse RV contractile function. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed pulmonary artery pressures and mean flow in 282 patients with pulmonary hypertension (166 SScPAH, 49 systemic sclerosis–related pulmonary hypertension with interstitial lung disease, and 67 IPAH). An inverse relation between pulmonary resistance and compliance was similar for all 3 groups, with a near constant resistance×compliance product. RV pressure–volume loops were measured in a subset, IPAH (n=5) and SScPAH (n=7), as well as SSc without PH (n=7) to derive contractile indexes (end-systolic elastance [Ees] and preload recruitable stroke work [Msw]), measures of RV load (arterial elastance [Ea]), and RV pulmonary artery coupling (Ees/Ea). RV afterload was similar in SScPAH and IPAH (pulmonary vascular resistance=7.0±4.5 versus 7.9±4.3 Wood units; Ea=0.9±0.4 versus 1.2±0.5 mm Hg/mL; pulmonary arterial compliance=2.4±1.5 versus 1.7±1.1 mL/mm Hg; P>0.3 for each). Although SScPAH did not have greater vascular stiffening compared with IPAH, RV contractility was more depressed (Ees=0.8±0.3 versus 2.3±1.1, P<0.01; Msw=21±11 versus 45±16, P=0.01), with differential RV-PA uncoupling (Ees/Ea=1.0±0.5 versus 2.1±1.0; P=0.03). This ratio was higher in SSc without PH (Ees/Ea=2.3±1.2; P=0.02 versus SScPAH). CONCLUSIONS: RV dysfunction is worse in SScPAH compared with IPAH at similar afterload, and may be because of intrinsic systolic function rather than enhanced pulmonary vascular resistive and pulsatile loading.
BACKGROUND:Systemic sclerosis–associated pulmonary artery hypertension (SScPAH) has a worse prognosis compared with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH), with a median survival of 3 years after diagnosis often caused by right ventricular (RV) failure. We tested whether SScPAH or systemic sclerosis–related pulmonary hypertension with interstitial lung disease imposes a greater pulmonary vascular load than IPAH and leads to worse RV contractile function. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed pulmonary artery pressures and mean flow in 282 patients with pulmonary hypertension (166 SScPAH, 49 systemic sclerosis–related pulmonary hypertension with interstitial lung disease, and 67 IPAH). An inverse relation between pulmonary resistance and compliance was similar for all 3 groups, with a near constant resistance×compliance product. RV pressure–volume loops were measured in a subset, IPAH (n=5) and SScPAH (n=7), as well as SSc without PH (n=7) to derive contractile indexes (end-systolic elastance [Ees] and preload recruitable stroke work [Msw]), measures of RV load (arterial elastance [Ea]), and RV pulmonary artery coupling (Ees/Ea). RV afterload was similar in SScPAH and IPAH (pulmonary vascular resistance=7.0±4.5 versus 7.9±4.3 Wood units; Ea=0.9±0.4 versus 1.2±0.5 mm Hg/mL; pulmonary arterial compliance=2.4±1.5 versus 1.7±1.1 mL/mm Hg; P>0.3 for each). Although SScPAH did not have greater vascular stiffening compared with IPAH, RV contractility was more depressed (Ees=0.8±0.3 versus 2.3±1.1, P<0.01; Msw=21±11 versus 45±16, P=0.01), with differential RV-PA uncoupling (Ees/Ea=1.0±0.5 versus 2.1±1.0; P=0.03). This ratio was higher in SSc without PH (Ees/Ea=2.3±1.2; P=0.02 versus SScPAH). CONCLUSIONS:RV dysfunction is worse in SScPAH compared with IPAH at similar afterload, and may be because of intrinsic systolic function rather than enhanced pulmonary vascular resistive and pulsatile loading.
Authors: Aránzazu Campo; Stephen C Mathai; Jérôme Le Pavec; Ari L Zaiman; Laura K Hummers; Danielle Boyce; Traci Housten; Hunter C Champion; Noah Lechtzin; Fredrick M Wigley; Reda E Girgis; Paul M Hassoun Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2010-03-25 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Eric Hachulla; Virginie Gressin; Loïc Guillevin; Patrick Carpentier; Elisabeth Diot; Jean Sibilia; André Kahan; Jean Cabane; Camille Francès; David Launay; Luc Mouthon; Yannick Allanore; Kiet Phong Tiev; Pierre Clerson; Pascal de Groote; Marc Humbert Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2005-12
Authors: S C Mathai; M Bueso; L K Hummers; D Boyce; N Lechtzin; J Le Pavec; A Campo; H C Champion; T Housten; P R Forfia; A L Zaiman; F M Wigley; R E Girgis; P M Hassoun Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2009-07-30 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Raymond L Benza; Dave P Miller; Mardi Gomberg-Maitland; Robert P Frantz; Aimee J Foreman; Christopher S Coffey; Adaani Frost; Robyn J Barst; David B Badesch; C Gregory Elliott; Theodore G Liou; Michael D McGoon Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-06-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: I Moyssakis; E Gialafos; V Vassiliou; E Taktikou; C Katsiari; D P Papadopoulos; P P Sfikakis Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2004-11-16 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Steven Hsu; Brian A Houston; Emmanouil Tampakakis; Anita C Bacher; Parker S Rhodes; Stephen C Mathai; Rachel L Damico; Todd M Kolb; Laura K Hummers; Ami A Shah; Zsuzsanna McMahan; Celia P Corona-Villalobos; Stefan L Zimmerman; Fredrick M Wigley; Paul M Hassoun; David A Kass; Ryan J Tedford Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-05-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Thomas S Metkus; Emmanouil Tampakakis; Christopher J Mullin; Brian A Houston; Todd M Kolb; Stephen C Mathai; Rachel Damico; Bradley A Maron; Paul M Hassoun; Roy G Brower; Ryan J Tedford Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 7.598