4.6 Article

Experience with inhaled iloprost and bosentan in portopulmonary hypertension

Journal

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
Volume 30, Issue 6, Pages 1096-1102

Publisher

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00032407

Keywords

bosentan; cirrhosis; iloprost; portopulmonary hypertension; pulmonary hypertension

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Novel treatments, such as prostanoids or endothelin receptor antagonists, have been introduced for various forms of pulmonary arterial hypertension, but the long-term effects of these treatments on portopulmonary hypertension (PPHT) are unknown. In a retrospective analysis, the present authors assessed the safety and efficacy of inhaled iloprost, a prostacyclin analogue, and bosentan, an endothelin receptor antagonist, in patients with PPHT. In total, 31 consecutive patients with Child class A or B cirrhosis and severe PPHT were treated for up to 3 yrs with either inhaled iloprost (n = 13) or bosentan (n = 18), and the effects on exercise capacity, haemodynamics and survival were evaluated. In the iloprost group, the survival rates at 1, 2 and 3 yrs were 77, 62 and 46%, respectively. In the bosentan group, the respective survival rates were 94, 89 and 89%. Event-free survival rates, i.e. survival without transplantation, right heart failure or clinical worsening requiring the introduction of a new treatment for pulmonary hypertension, was also significantly better in the bosentan group. Bosentan had significantly better effects than inhaled iloprost on exercise capacity, as determined by the 6-min walk test, as well as on haemodynamics. Both treatments proved to be safe, especially in regards of liver function. In the present series of patients with well-preserved liver function and severe portopulmonary hypertension, treatment with both inhaled iloprost and bosentan appeared to be safe. Patients treated with bosentan had higher survival rates, but prospective controlled studies are required to confirm these findings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available