AIMS: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a relevant complication of left heart disease (LHD). The 2015 ESC/ERS PH guidelines report two different haemodynamic subsets of PH due to LHD (PH-LHD) based on levels of pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) and diastolic pressure gradient (DPG): isolated post-capillary PH (Ipc-PH) and combined post- and pre-capillary PH (Cpc-PH). The objective of this study is to evaluate the prognostic value of Ipc-PH and Cpc-PH. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 276 consecutive incident patients with PH-LHD were included. According to the guidelines, Ipc-PH is defined by DPG <7 mmHg and/or PVR ≤3 Wood units (WU) and Cpc-PH by DPG ≥7 mmHg and/or PVR >3 WU. Using this definition, we identified three patient groups: Ipc-PH with both normal PVR and DPG (108 patients); Cpc-PH with both increased PVR and DPG (66 patients); and an intermediate group with either increased PVR or DPG (102 patients). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups using the log-rank test. Patients with Ipc-PH had better survival compared with the group of patients with Cpc-PH (P = 0.026) and the intermediate group (P = 0.025). No survival difference was detected between patients with Cpc-PH and the intermediate group (P = 0.891). Patients with normal PVR had a better survival compared with those with elevated PVR (P = 0.012); while no difference was observed according to the level of DPG (P = 0.253). CONCLUSION: Patients with Ipc-PH have a better prognosis compared with patients with Cpc-PH and with patients with isolated increase of PVR or DPG. Pulmonary vascular resistance has a better predictive value than DPG in patients with PH-LHD.
AIMS: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a relevant complication of left heart disease (LHD). The 2015 ESC/ERS PH guidelines report two different haemodynamic subsets of PH due to LHD (PH-LHD) based on levels of pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) and diastolic pressure gradient (DPG): isolated post-capillary PH (Ipc-PH) and combined post- and pre-capillary PH (Cpc-PH). The objective of this study is to evaluate the prognostic value of Ipc-PH and Cpc-PH. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 276 consecutive incident patients with PH-LHD were included. According to the guidelines, Ipc-PH is defined by DPG <7 mmHg and/or PVR ≤3 Wood units (WU) and Cpc-PH by DPG ≥7 mmHg and/or PVR >3 WU. Using this definition, we identified three patient groups: Ipc-PH with both normal PVR and DPG (108 patients); Cpc-PH with both increased PVR and DPG (66 patients); and an intermediate group with either increased PVR or DPG (102 patients). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups using the log-rank test. Patients with Ipc-PH had better survival compared with the group of patients with Cpc-PH (P = 0.026) and the intermediate group (P = 0.025). No survival difference was detected between patients with Cpc-PH and the intermediate group (P = 0.891). Patients with normal PVR had a better survival compared with those with elevated PVR (P = 0.012); while no difference was observed according to the level of DPG (P = 0.253). CONCLUSION:Patients with Ipc-PH have a better prognosis compared with patients with Cpc-PH and with patients with isolated increase of PVR or DPG. Pulmonary vascular resistance has a better predictive value than DPG in patients with PH-LHD.
Authors: M Riccardi; M Pagnesi; E Sciatti; C M Lombardi; R M Inciardi; M Metra; E Vizzardi Journal: Heart Fail Rev Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 4.214
Authors: David G Kiely; David Levin; Paul Hassoun; David D Ivy; Pei-Ni Jone; Jumaa Bwika; Steven M Kawut; Jim Lordan; Angela Lungu; Jeremy Mazurek; Shahin Moledina; Horst Olschewski; Andrew Peacock; Goverdhan Dutt Puri; Farbod Rahaghi; Michal Schafer; Mark Schiebler; Nicholas Screaton; Merryn Tawhai; Edwin Jr Van Beek; Anton Vonk-Noordegraaf; Rebecca R Vanderpool; John Wort; Lan Zhao; Jim Wild; Jens Vogel-Claussen; Andrew J Swift Journal: Pulm Circ Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 3.017
Authors: Sebastian Carballo; Philippe Musso; Nicolas Garin; Hajo Müller; Jacques Serratrice; François Mach; David Carballo; Jérôme Stirnemann Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-10-15 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Emmanouil Tampakakis; Sanjiv J Shah; Barry A Borlaug; Peter J Leary; Harnish H Patel; Wayne L Miller; Benjamin W Kelemen; Brian A Houston; Todd M Kolb; Rachel Damico; Stephen C Mathai; Edward K Kasper; Paul M Hassoun; David A Kass; Ryan J Tedford Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 8.790