4.7 Article

Hemodynamic Predictors of Survival in Scleroderma-related Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200912-1820OC

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [K23 HL092297, P50 HL084946]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) related to systemic sclerosis (SSc) has a poorer prognosis compared with other forms of PAH for reasons that remain unexplained. Objectives: To identify risk factors of mortality in a well-characterized cohort of patients with PAH related to systemic sclerosis (SSc-PAH). Methods: Seventy-six consecutive patients with SSc (64 women and 12 men; mean age 61 +/- 11 yr) were diagnosed with PAH by heart catheterization in a single center, starting in January 2000, and followed over time. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated and mortality risk factors were analyzed. Measurements and Main Results: Forty (53%) patients were in World Health Organization functional class III or IV. Mean pulmonary artery pressure was 41 +/- 11 mm Hg, pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) was 8.6 +/- 5.6 Wood units, and cardiac index was 2.4 +/- 0.7 L/min/m(2). Median follow-up time was 36 months, with 42 deaths observed. Survival estimates were 85%, 72%, 67%, 50%, and 36% at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified PVR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.18; P < 0.01), stroke volume index (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-0.99; P = 0.02), and pulmonary arterial capacitance (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.91; P = 0.03) as strong predictors of survival. An estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) portended a threefold risk of mortality. Conclusions: Our results suggest that specific components of right ventricular dysfunction and renal impairment contribute to increased mortality in SSc-PAH. Understanding the mechanisms of right ventricular dysfunction in response to increased afterload should lead to improved targeted therapy in these patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据