Rebecca R Vanderpool1, Kendall S Hunter2, Michael Insel3, Joe G N Garcia4, Edward J Bedrick5, Ryan J Tedford6, Franz P Rischard7. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 2. Department of Bioengineering and Cardiology, UC Denver Medical Campus, Denver, CO. 3. Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep, and Allergy Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep, and Allergy Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 5. BIO5 Institute, Center of Biostatistics and Informatics, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 6. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC. 7. Department of Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ; Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep, and Allergy Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. Electronic address: frischard@deptofmed.arizona.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multiparametric risk assessment is used in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) to target therapy. However, this strategy is imperfect because most patients remain at intermediate or high risk after initial treatment, with low risk being the goal. Metrics of right ventricular (RV) adaptation are promising tools that may help refine our therapeutic strategy. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does RV adaptation predict therapeutic response over time? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We evaluated 52 incident treatment-naive patients with advanced PAH by catheterization and cardiac imaging longitudinally at baseline, follow-up 1 (∼3 months), and follow-up 2 (∼18 months). All patients received goal-directed therapy with parenteral treprostinil and/or combination therapy with treatment escalation if functional class I or II was not achieved. On the basis of their therapeutic response, patients were evaluated at follow-up 1 as nonresponders (died) or as responders, and again at follow-up 2 as super-responders (low risk) or partial responders (high/intermediate risk). Multiparametric risk was based on a simplified European Respiratory Society/European Society of Cardiology guideline score. RV adaptation was evaluated with the single-beat coupling ratio (Ees/Ea) and diastolic function with diastolic elastance (Eed). Data are expressed as mean ± SD or as OR (95% CI). RESULTS: Nine patients (17%) were nonresponders. PAH-directed therapy improved the European Respiratory Society low-risk score from 1 (2%) at baseline to 23 (55%) at follow-up 2. Ees/Ea at presentation was nonsignificantly higher in responders (0.9 ± 0.4) vs nonresponders (0.6 ± 0.4; P = .09) but could not be used to predict super-responder status at follow-up 2 (OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.28-7.0]; P = .84). Baseline RV ejection fraction and change in Eed were successfully used to predict super-responder status at follow-up 2 (OR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.0-1.27]; P = .009 and OR, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.86-0.96]; P = .04, respectively). INTERPRETATION: In patients with advanced PAH, RV-pulmonary arterial coupling could not discriminate irreversible RV failure (nonresponders) at presentation but showed a late trend to improvement by follow-up 2. Early change in Eed and baseline RV ejection fraction were the best predictors of therapeutic response.
BACKGROUND: Multiparametric risk assessment is used in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) to target therapy. However, this strategy is imperfect because most patients remain at intermediate or high risk after initial treatment, with low risk being the goal. Metrics of right ventricular (RV) adaptation are promising tools that may help refine our therapeutic strategy. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does RV adaptation predict therapeutic response over time? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We evaluated 52 incident treatment-naive patients with advanced PAH by catheterization and cardiac imaging longitudinally at baseline, follow-up 1 (∼3 months), and follow-up 2 (∼18 months). All patients received goal-directed therapy with parenteral treprostinil and/or combination therapy with treatment escalation if functional class I or II was not achieved. On the basis of their therapeutic response, patients were evaluated at follow-up 1 as nonresponders (died) or as responders, and again at follow-up 2 as super-responders (low risk) or partial responders (high/intermediate risk). Multiparametric risk was based on a simplified European Respiratory Society/European Society of Cardiology guideline score. RV adaptation was evaluated with the single-beat coupling ratio (Ees/Ea) and diastolic function with diastolic elastance (Eed). Data are expressed as mean ± SD or as OR (95% CI). RESULTS: Nine patients (17%) were nonresponders. PAH-directed therapy improved the European Respiratory Society low-risk score from 1 (2%) at baseline to 23 (55%) at follow-up 2. Ees/Ea at presentation was nonsignificantly higher in responders (0.9 ± 0.4) vs nonresponders (0.6 ± 0.4; P = .09) but could not be used to predict super-responder status at follow-up 2 (OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.28-7.0]; P = .84). Baseline RV ejection fraction and change in Eed were successfully used to predict super-responder status at follow-up 2 (OR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.0-1.27]; P = .009 and OR, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.86-0.96]; P = .04, respectively). INTERPRETATION: In patients with advanced PAH, RV-pulmonary arterial coupling could not discriminate irreversible RV failure (nonresponders) at presentation but showed a late trend to improvement by follow-up 2. Early change in Eed and baseline RV ejection fraction were the best predictors of therapeutic response.
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: Khodr Tello; Manuel J Richter; Jens Axmann; Martin Buhmann; Werner Seeger; Robert Naeije; Hossein Ardeschir Ghofrani; Henning Gall Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2018-09-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Steven Hsu; Kristen M Kokkonen-Simon; Jonathan A Kirk; Todd M Kolb; Rachel L Damico; Stephen C Mathai; Monica Mukherjee; Ami A Shah; Fredrick M Wigley; Kenneth B Margulies; Paul M Hassoun; Marc K Halushka; Ryan J Tedford; David A Kass Journal: Circulation Date: 2018-01-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Marius M Hoeper; Christine Pausch; Ekkehard Grünig; Hans Klose; Gerd Staehler; Doerte Huscher; David Pittrow; Karen M Olsson; Carmine Dario Vizza; Henning Gall; Nicola Benjamin; Oliver Distler; Christian Opitz; J Simon R Gibbs; Marion Delcroix; H Ardeschir Ghofrani; Stephan Rosenkranz; Ralf Ewert; Harald Kaemmerer; Tobias J Lange; Hans-Joachim Kabitz; Dirk Skowasch; Andris Skride; Elena Jureviciene; Egle Paleviciute; Skaidrius Miliauskas; Martin Claussen; Juergen Behr; Katrin Milger; Michael Halank; Heinrike Wilkens; Hubert Wirtz; Elena Pfeuffer-Jovic; Lars Harbaum; Werner Scholtz; Daniel Dumitrescu; Leonhard Bruch; Gerry Coghlan; Claus Neurohr; Iraklis Tsangaris; Matthias Gorenflo; Laura Scelsi; Anton Vonk-Noordegraaf; Silvia Ulrich; Matthias Held Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Tim Lahm; Ivor S Douglas; Stephen L Archer; Harm J Bogaard; Naomi C Chesler; Francois Haddad; Anna R Hemnes; Steven M Kawut; Jeffrey A Kline; Todd M Kolb; Stephen C Mathai; Olaf Mercier; Evangelos D Michelakis; Robert Naeije; Rubin M Tuder; Corey E Ventetuolo; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Norbert F Voelkel; Anton Vonk-Noordegraaf; Paul M Hassoun Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2018-08-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Michael Fiechter; Tobias A Fuchs; Catherine Gebhard; Julia Stehli; Bernd Klaeser; Barbara E Stähli; Robert Manka; Costantina Manes; Felix C Tanner; Oliver Gaemperli; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 1.930