Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Associated with Portal Hypertension and HIV Infection: Comparative Characteristics and Prognostic Predictors.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) may complicate both portal hypertension (Po-PAH) and HIV infection (HIV-PAH). These two conditions, however, frequently coexist in the same patient (HIV/Po-PAH). We evaluated clinical, functional, hemodynamic characteristics and prognostic parameters of these three groups of patients. METHODS: We included patients with Po-PAH, HIV-PAH and HIV/Po-PAH referred to a single center. We compared clinical, functional and hemodynamic parameters, severity of liver disease [Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) and Model for End-stage Liver Disease-Na (MELD-Na) scores], CD4 count and highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) administration. Prognostic variables were identified through Cox-regression analysis. RESULTS: Patients with Po-PAH (n = 128) were the oldest, patients with HIV-PAH (n = 41) had the worst hemodynamic profile and patients with HIV/Po-PAH (n = 35) had the best exercise capacity. Independent predictors of mortality were age and CTP score for Po-PAH, HAART administration for HIV-PAH, MELD-Na score and hepatic venous-portal gradient for HIV/Po-PAH. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HIV/Po-PAH are younger and have a better exercise capacity than patients with Po-PAH, have a better exercise capacity and hemodynamic profile compared to patients with HIV-PAH, and their prognosis seems to be related to the hepatic disease rather than to HIV infection. The prognosis of patients with Po-PAH and HIV-PAH seems to be related to the underlying disease.

Comparison of different treatment strategies in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a single centre real-world experience.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) has been the most effective therapy for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). However, there is a substantial proportion of patients deemed not operable in whom other treatment strategies are available: medical therapy and balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA). We aimed to compare different CTEPH treatment strategies effect in a real-world setting. METHODS: All patients with CTEPH referred to our centre were included. We compare the short-term clinical, functional, exercise and haemodynamic effect of medical therapy (irrespective of subsequent treatment strategies), PEA and BPA (irrespective of previous/subsequent treatment strategies); we also describe the long-term outcome of the different patient groups. RESULTS: We included 467 patients (39% were treated only with medical therapy, 43% underwent PEA, 13% underwent BPA and 5% were not treated with any therapy). Patients treated only with medical therapy were the oldest; compared to patients undergoing PEA, they had a lower exercise capacity, a higher risk profile and gained a lower haemodynamic, functional and survival benefit from the treatment. Patients undergoing BPA had a lower haemodynamic improvement but a comparable functional, exercise and risk improvement and a similar survival compared to patients undergoing PEA; their survival is anyway better than patients undergoing only medical treatment. Untreated historical control patients had the worst survival. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm the superiority of PEA compared to any alternative treatment in CTEPH patients and we observe that BPA, in patients deemed not operable or with persistent/recurrent PH after PEA, leads to a better outcome than medical therapy alone.

[Balloon pulmonary angioplasty in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: 5 years of experience in Italy]. / L'angioplastica delle arterie polmonari nel cuore polmonare cronico tromboembolico: 5 anni di esperienza in Italia.

BACKGROUND: Balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) represents a therapeutic option for the treatment of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) in patients who are not eligible for surgical pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) or with persistent/recurrent symptomatic pulmonary arterial hypertension after PEA. This study evaluated the safety of BPA during 5 years of experience of the only Italian center systematically performing this procedure. METHODS: The BPA program was activated at the S. Orsola Polyclinic in Bologna in June 2015. Life-threatening periprocedural complications were defined as: death <30 days, need for cardiopulmonary support, hemoptysis with the need for endotracheal intubation. Serious complications were vascular complications requiring surgical or percutaneous intervention. Other endpoints of interest were: hemoptysis, pulmonary vascular damage with or without hemoptysis, and pulmonary reperfusion injury with high-resolution computed tomography lung scan at 24 h. RESULTS: From June 2015 to September 2020, 50 patients (45% male, median age 68 years), 42 inoperable and 8 with persistent/recurrent pulmonary hypertension after PEA, underwent 156 BPA procedures at our institution. There was one life-threatening complication (2% of patients, 0.06% of the procedures), i.e. severe hemoptysis requiring endotracheal intubation, and four serious complications (8% of the patients, 2.6% of the procedures), i.e. one pulmonary artery perforation requiring percutaneous treatment and three access-site vascular complications requiring surgery. There were no deaths <30 days. Pulmonary reperfusion injury occurred in 37 patients (74%) for a total of 96 sessions (62%). However, reperfusion injury was limited and with subclinical course in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the relative safety of BPA in patients with CTEPH who are not candidates for heart surgery or with persistent pulmonary hypertension after PEA in the first large Italian experience.

A pragmatic approach to risk assessment in pulmonary arterial hypertension using the 2015 European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To optimise treatment of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), the 2015 European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society guidelines recommend using risk stratification, with the aim of patients achieving low-risk status. Previous analyses of registries made progress in using risk stratification approaches, however, the focus is often on patients with a low-risk prognosis, whereas most PAH patients are in intermediate-risk or high-risk categories. Using only six parameters with high prognostic relevance, we aimed to demonstrate a pragmatic approach to individual patient risk assessment to discriminate between patients at low risk, intermediate risk and high risk of death. METHODS: Risk assessment was performed combining six parameters in four criteria: (1) WHO functional class, (2) 6 min walk distance, (3) N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (BNP)/BNP plasma levels or right atrial pressure and (4) cardiac index or mixed venous oxygen saturation. Assessments were made at baseline and at first follow-up after 3-4 months. RESULTS: 725 PAH treatment-naive patients were analysed. Survival estimates between risk groups were statistically significant at baseline and first follow-up (p<0.001), even when the analysis was performed within PAH etiological subgroups. Similar results were observed in 208 previously treated PAH patients. Furthermore, patients who remained at or improved to low risk had a significantly better estimated survival compared with patients who remained at or worsened to intermediate risk or high risk (p≤0.005). CONCLUSION: The simplified risk-assessment method can discriminate idiopathic, connective-tissue-disease-associated and congenital-heart-disease-associated PAH patients into meaningful high-risk, intermediate-risk and low-risk groups at baseline and first follow-up. This pragmatic approach reinforces targeting a low-risk profile for PAH patients.