Search

Background: In pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), there are no data comparing initial triple oral therapy with initial double oral therapy., Objectives: TRITON (The Efficacy and Safety of Initial Triple Versus Initial Dual Oral Combination Therapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension; NCT02558231), a multicenter, double-blind, randomized phase 3b study, evaluated initial triple (macitentan, tadalafil, and selexipag) versus initial double (macitentan, tadalafil, and placebo) oral therapy in newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients with PAH., Methods: Efficacy was assessed until the last patient randomized completed week 26 (end of main observation period). The primary endpoint was change in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) at week 26., Results: Patients were assigned to initial triple (n = 123) or initial double therapy (n = 124). At week 26, both treatment strategies reduced PVR compared with baseline (by 54% and 52%), with no significant difference between groups (ratio of geometric means: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.86-1.07; P = 0.42). Six-minute walk distance and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide improved by week 26, with no difference between groups. Risk for disease progression (to end of main observation period) was reduced with initial triple versus initial double therapy (hazard ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.32-1.09). Most common adverse events with initial triple therapy included headache, diarrhea, and nausea. By the end of the main observation period, 2 patients in the initial triple and 9 in the initial double therapy groups had died., Conclusions: In patients with newly diagnosed PAH, both treatment strategies markedly reduced PVR by week 26, with no significant difference between groups (primary endpoint not met). Exploratory analyses suggested a possible signal for improved long-term outcomes with initial triple versus initial double oral therapy., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded by Actelion Pharmaceuticals, a Janssen Pharmaceutical Company of Johnson & Johnson. Dr Chin has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, the National Institutes of Health, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, and SoniVie; has served on advisory boards for Bayer Healthcare (through the University of California, San Diego) and Flowonix; has served as an adjudication committee member for Arena Pharmaceuticals; is an associate editor of Circulation for the American Heart Association; and has received consultancy fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Prof Sitbon has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; and has served as an advisory board member for and received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Dr Doelberg is an employee of Actelion Pharmaceuticals. Dr Feldman has received speaker and consultancy fees from Bayer and United Therapeutics; and has received consultancy fees from Gilead, Gossamer, Acceleron, Altavant, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, and Bellerophon. Dr Gibbs has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Complexa, and Acceleron; has received consultancy fees from Arena; has received speaker fees from GlaxoSmithKline and Merck Sharp & Dohme; has served as a clinical endpoints committee member for Pfizer, Bayer, Bellerophon, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, and United Therapeutics; and has served as a data and safety monitoring board member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Prof Grünig has received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and GlaxoSmithKline; and has received grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Bayer/Merck Sharp & Dohme, GlaxoSmithKline, and United Therapeutics. Prof Hoeper has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received speaker and consultancy fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer; and has received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Mr Martin is an employee of Actelion Pharmaceuticals. Dr Mathai has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; and has served as a consultant for Arena, Liquidia, and United Therapeutics. Prof McLaughlin has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; has received grants from Eiger and SoniVie; and has received personal fees from United Therapeutics, Arena, Caremark, Medtronic, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. Dr Perchenet is an employee of Actelion Pharmaceuticals; has previously held stock and stock options with Actelion Pharmaceuticals; and currently holds stock and stock options in the parent company Johnson & Johnson. Dr Poch has received speaker and consultancy fees from Bayer Healthcare. Dr Saggar has received consultancy fees and research funding from United Therapeutics and Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Prof Simonneau has served as a steering committee member for and received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; and has received speaker and consultancy fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer. Prof Galiè is a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received grant support, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; and has received grant support and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and GlaxoSmithKline., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Registry data suggest that disease progression in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is indicative of poor prognosis. However, the prognostic relevance of PAH-related morbidity has not been formally evaluated in randomized controlled trials., Objectives: The purpose of these analyses was to assess the impact of morbidity events on the risk of subsequent mortality using the landmark method and data from the SERAPHIN and GRIPHON studies., Methods: For each study, the risk of all-cause death up to the end of the study was assessed from the landmark time point (months 3, 6, and 12) according to whether a patient had experienced a primary endpoint morbidity event before the landmark. Each analysis was conducted using data from all patients who were available for survival follow-up at the landmark., Results: In the SERAPHIN study, on the basis of the 3-month landmark time point, patients who experienced a morbidity event before month 3 had an increased risk of death compared with patients who did not (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.39; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.94 to 5.92). In the GRIPHON study, on the basis of the 3-month landmark time point, there was also an increased risk with a HR of 4.48; (95% CI: 2.98 to 6.73). Analyses based on 6-month and 12-month landmarks also showed increased risk in patients who experienced morbidity events, albeit with a reduced HR., Conclusions: These results demonstrate the prognostic relevance of PAH-related morbidity as defined in the SERAPHIN and GRIPHON studies, highlighting the importance of preventing disease progression in patients with PAH and supporting the clinical relevance of SERAPHIN and GRIPHON morbidity events. (Study of Macitentan [ACT-064992] on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients With Symptomatic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension [SERAPHIN]; NCT00660179; Selexipag [ACT-293987] in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension [GRIPHON]; NCT01106014)., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endothelial cell (EC) dysfunction plays a central role in the pathogenesis of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), promoting vasoconstriction, smooth muscle proliferation, and inflammation., Objectives: This study sought to test the hypothesis that nebivolol, a β1-antagonist and β2,3-agonist, may improve PAH and reverse the PAH-related phenotype of pulmonary ECs (P-EC)., Methods: We compared the effects of nebivolol with metoprolol, a first-generation β1-selective β-blocker, on human cultured PAH and control P-EC proliferation, vasoactive and proinflammatory factor production, and crosstalk with PA smooth muscle cells. We assessed the effects of both β-blockers in precontracted PA rings. We also compared the effects of both β-blockers in experimental PAH., Results: PAH P-ECs overexpressed the proinflammatory mediators interleukin-6 and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, fibroblast growth factor-2, and the potent vasoconstrictive agent endothelin-1 as compared with control cells. This pathological phenotype was corrected by nebivolol but not metoprolol in a dose-dependent fashion. We confirmed that PAH P-EC proliferate more than control cells and stimulate more PA smooth muscle cell mitosis, a growth abnormality that was normalized by nebivolol but not by metoprolol. Nebivolol but not metoprolol induced endothelium-dependent and nitric oxide-dependent relaxation of PA. Nebivolol was more potent than metoprolol in improving cardiac function, pulmonary vascular remodeling, and inflammation of rats with monocrotaline-induced pulmonary hypertension., Conclusions: Nebivolol could be a promising option for the management of PAH, improving endothelial dysfunction, pulmonary vascular remodeling, and right heart function. Until clinical studies are undertaken, however, routine use of β-blockers in PAH cannot be recommended., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In 1998, a clinical classification of pulmonary hypertension (PH) was established, categorizing PH into groups which share similar pathological and hemodynamic characteristics and therapeutic approaches. During the 5th World Symposium held in Nice, France, in 2013, the consensus was reached to maintain the general scheme of previous clinical classifications. However, modifications and updates especially for Group 1 patients (pulmonary arterial hypertension [PAH]) were proposed. The main change was to withdraw persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN) from Group 1 because this entity carries more differences than similarities with other PAH subgroups. In the current classification, PPHN is now designated number 1. Pulmonary hypertension associated with chronic hemolytic anemia has been moved from Group 1 PAH to Group 5, unclear/multifactorial mechanism. In addition, it was decided to add specific items related to pediatric pulmonary hypertension in order to create a comprehensive, common classification for both adults and children. Therefore, congenital or acquired left-heart inflow/outflow obstructive lesions and congenital cardiomyopathies have been added to Group 2, and segmental pulmonary hypertension has been added to Group 5. Last, there were no changes for Groups 2, 3, and 4., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) and diffuse parenchymal lung diseases (DPLD), including idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and sarcoidosis, are associated with a high incidence of pulmonary hypertension (PH), which is linked with exercise limitation and a worse prognosis. Patients with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) are particularly prone to the development of PH. Echocardiography and right heart catheterization are the principal modalities for the diagnosis of COPD and DPLD. For discrimination between group 1 PH patients with concomitant respiratory abnormalities and group 3 PH patients (PH caused by lung disease), patients should be transferred to a center with expertise in both PH and lung diseases for comprehensive evaluation. The task force encompassing the authors of this article provided criteria for this discrimination and suggested using the following definitions for group 3 patients, as exemplified for COPD, IPF, and CPFE: COPD/IPF/CPFE without PH (mean pulmonary artery pressure [mPAP] <25 mm Hg); COPD/IPF/CPFE with PH (mPAP ≥25 mm Hg); PH-COPD, PH-IPF, and PH-CPFE); COPD/IPF/CPFE with severe PH (mPAP ≥35 mm Hg or mPAP ≥25 mm Hg with low cardiac index [CI <2.0 l/min/m(2)]; severe PH-COPD, severe PH-IPF, and severe PH-CPFE). The "severe PH group" includes only a minority of chronic lung disease patients who are suspected of having strong general vascular abnormalities (remodeling) accompanying the parenchymal disease and with evidence of an exhausted circulatory reserve rather than an exhausted ventilatory reserve underlying the limitation of exercise capacity. Exertional dyspnea disproportionate to pulmonary function tests, low carbon monoxide diffusion capacity, and rapid decline of arterial oxygenation upon exercise are typical clinical features of this subgroup with poor prognosis. Studies evaluating the effect of pulmonary arterial hypertension drugs currently not approved for group 3 PH patients should focus on this severe PH group, and for the time being, these patients should be transferred to expert centers for individualized patient care., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pulmonary hypertension (PH), a common complication of left heart diseases (LHD), negatively impacts symptoms, exercise capacity, and outcome. Although the true prevalence of PH-LHD is unknown, a subset of patients might present significant PH that cannot be explained by a passive increase in left-sided filling pressures. The term "out-of-proportion" PH has been used to identify that population without a clear definition, which has been found less than ideal and created confusion. We propose a change in terminology and a new definition of PH due to LHD. We suggest to abandon "out-of-proportion" PH and to distinguish "isolated post-capillary PH" from "post-capillary PH with a pre-capillary component" on the basis of the pressure difference between diastolic pulmonary artery pressure and pulmonary artery wedge pressure. Although there is no validated treatment for PH-LHD, we provide insights into management and discuss completed and randomized trials in this condition. Finally, we provide recommendations for future clinical trials to establish safety and efficacy of novel compounds to target this area of unmet medical need., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and durability of efficacy of tadalafil for pulmonary arterial hypertension., Background: Tadalafil is an oral phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor approved for PAH treatment. In the multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized, 16-week PHIRST (Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Response to Tadalafil) study, tadalafil 40 mg improved exercise capacity and delayed clinical worsening., Methods: Eligible patients from PHIRST received once-daily tadalafil 20 mg (T20 mg) or 40 mg (T40 mg) (n = 357) in the double-blind, 52-week, uncontrolled extension study (PHIRST-2); 293 patients completed PHIRST-2. Durability of efficacy was explored using the 6-min walk distance (6MWD) test. Clinical worsening and changes in World Health Organization functional class were evaluated., Results: The safety profile of tadalafil in PHIRST-2 was similar to that in PHIRST, with typical phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor adverse events. The 6MWDs achieved in PHIRST for the subset of patients receiving T20 mg and T40 mg in both PHIRST and PHIRST-2 (406 ± 67 m [n = 52] and 413 ± 81 m [n = 59] at PHIRST-2 enrollment, respectively) were maintained at PHIRST-2 completion (415 ± 80 m [n = 51] and 410 ± 78 m [n = 59], respectively). Numerically fewer patients who were on T40 mg in PHIRST and PHIRST-2 experienced World Health Organization functional class deterioration (6% [n = 5]) compared with those randomized to T20 mg (9% [n = 7]) across both studies. Post hoc analyses showed that background bosentan use and higher 6MWD at PHIRST baseline were associated with fewer clinical worsening events., Conclusions: Long-term treatment with tadalafil was well tolerated in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. In patients receiving either T20 mg or T40 mg, the improvements in 6MWD demonstrated in the 16-week PHIRST study appeared sustained for up to 52 additional weeks of treatment in PHIRST-2. (Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Response to Tadalafil Study; NCT00549302)., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The aim of a clinical classification of pulmonary hypertension (PH) is to group together different manifestations of disease sharing similarities in pathophysiologic mechanisms, clinical presentation, and therapeutic approaches. In 2003, during the 3rd World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension, the clinical classification of PH initially adopted in 1998 during the 2nd World Symposium was slightly modified. During the 4th World Symposium held in 2008, it was decided to maintain the general architecture and philosophy of the previous clinical classifications. The modifications adopted during this meeting principally concern Group 1, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). This subgroup includes patients with PAH with a family history or patients with idiopathic PAH with germline mutations (e.g., bone morphogenetic protein receptor-2, activin receptor-like kinase type 1, and endoglin). In the new classification, schistosomiasis and chronic hemolytic anemia appear as separate entities in the subgroup of PAH associated with identified diseases. Finally, it was decided to place pulmonary veno-occlusive disease and pulmonary capillary hemangiomatosis in a separate group, distinct from but very close to Group 1 (now called Group 1'). Thus, Group 1 of PAH is now more homogeneous.

Over the past 2 decades, pulmonary arterial hypertension has evolved from a uniformly fatal condition to a chronic, manageable disease in many cases, the result of unparalleled development of new therapies and advances in early diagnosis. However, none of the currently available therapies is curative, so the search for new treatment strategies continues. With a deeper understanding of the genetics and the molecular mechanisms of pulmonary vascular disorders, we are now at the threshold of entering a new therapeutic era. Our working group addressed what can be expected in the near future. The topics span the understanding of genetic variations, novel antiproliferative treatments, the role of stem cells, the right ventricle as a therapeutic target, and strategies and challenges for the translation of novel experimental findings into clinical practice.

Objectives: Our goal was to investigate the effect of treatment with the oral dual endothelin receptor antagonist bosentan on the hemodynamics and exercise capacity of patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH)., Background: CTEPH is characterized by vascular obstruction and remodeling, leading to increased pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). Although pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is potentially curative, medical therapy is needed in patients with inoperable disease or persistent/recurrent pulmonary hypertension after PEA., Methods: The BENEFiT (Bosentan Effects in iNopErable Forms of chronIc Thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension) study was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in CTEPH including patients with either inoperable CTEPH or persistent/recurrent pulmonary hypertension after PEA (>6 months after PEA). Independent coprimary end points were change in PVR as a percentage of baseline and change from baseline in 6-min walk distance after 16 weeks of treatment with bosentan or placebo. Secondary end points included change from baseline in World Health Organization functional class and other hemodynamic parameters., Results: One hundred fifty-seven patients were enrolled and randomized: 80 to placebo, 77 to bosentan. A statistically significant treatment effect (TE) of bosentan over placebo on PVR was demonstrated: -24.1% of baseline (95% confidence interval [CI]: -31.5% to -16.0%; p < 0.0001). Total pulmonary resistance (TE: -193 dynxsxcm(-5); 95% CI: -283 to -104 dyn.s.cm(-5); p < 0.0001) and cardiac index (TE: 0.3 lxmin(-1)xm(-2); 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.46 lxmin(-1)xm(-2); p = 0.0007) improved. Mean TE on 6-min walk distance was +2.2 m (95% CI: -22.5 to 26.8 m; p = 0.5449). Bosentan treatment was well tolerated., Conclusions: This study demonstrated a positive TE of bosentan on hemodynamics in this patient population. No improvement was observed in exercise capacity. Further trials are needed to define the role of medical therapy in patients with CTEPH (Bosentan Effects in Inoperable Forms of Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension; NCT00313222).

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of four doses of ambrisentan, an oral endothelin type A receptor-selective antagonist, in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH)., Background: Pulmonary arterial hypertension is a life-threatening and progressive disease with limited treatment options. Endothelin is a vasoconstrictor and smooth muscle cell mitogen that plays a critical role in the pathogenesis and progression of PAH., Methods: In this double-blind, dose-ranging study, 64 patients with idiopathic PAH or PAH associated with collagen vascular disease, anorexigen use, or human immunodeficiency virus infection were randomized to receive 1, 2.5, 5, or 10 mg of ambrisentan once daily for 12 weeks followed by 12 weeks of open-label ambrisentan. The primary end point was an improvement from baseline in 6-min walk distance (6MWD); secondary end points included Borg dyspnea index, World Health Organization (WHO) functional class, a subject global assessment, and cardiopulmonary hemodynamics., Results: At 12 weeks, ambrisentan increased 6MWD (+36.1 m, p < 0.0001) with similar and statistically significant increases for each dose group (range, +33.9 to +38.1 m). Improvements were also observed in Borg dyspnea index, WHO functional class, subject global assessment, mean pulmonary arterial pressure (-5.2 mm Hg, p < 0.0001), and cardiac index (+0.33 l/min/m2, p < 0.0008). Adverse events were mild and unrelated to dose, including the incidence of elevated serum aminotransferase concentrations >3 times the upper limit of normal (3.1%)., Conclusions: Ambrisentan appears to improve exercise capacity, symptoms, and hemodynamics in patients with PAH. The incidence and severity of liver enzyme abnormalities appear to be low.

The numerous controlled clinical trials performed recently in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) can allow us to abandon a clinical-based treatment strategy and adopt an evidence-based therapy. Both uncontrolled and controlled clinical trials with different compounds and procedures are reviewed and compared in order to define the efficacy-to-side-effect ratio of each treatment. A grading system for the level of evidence of treatments based on the number of favorable controlled clinical trials performed with a given compound is adopted; a treatment algorithm based on the evidence derived by clinical trials is proposed. It includes drugs approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of patients with PAH and/or drugs available on the market for other indications. The algorithm is restricted to patients in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III or IV because they represent the largest population included in controlled clinical trials. In addition, the different treatments have been evaluated mainly in sporadic, idiopathic PAH and in PAH associated with scleroderma or to anorexigen use. Extrapolation of these recommendations to the other PAH subgroups should be done with caution. Oral anticoagulation is proposed for all patients, whereas diuretic treatment and supplemental oxygen are indicated in cases of fluid retention and hypoxemia, respectively. High doses of calcium channel blockers are indicated only in the minority of patients who are responders to acute vasoreactivity testing. Nonresponders to acute vasoreactivity testing, or responders who remain in NYHA functional class III, should be considered candidates for treatment with either an endothelin receptor antagonist or a prostanoid. Continuous intravenous administration of epoprostenol is proposed as rescue treatment in NYHA functional class IV patients. Phosphodiesterase-V inhibitors should be considered in patients who have failed or are not candidates to other therapies. Combination therapy can be attempted in selected cases. Both balloon atrial septostomy and lung transplantation are indicated for refractory patients or where medical treatment is unavailable.

In 1998, during the Second World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension (PH) held in Evian, France, a clinical classification of PH was proposed. The aim of the Evian classification was to individualize different categories sharing similarities in pathophysiological mechanisms, clinical presentation, and therapeutic options. The Evian classification is now well accepted and widely used in clinical practice, especially in specialized centers. In addition, this classification has been used by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Agency for Drug Evaluation for the labeling of newly approved medications in PH. In 2003, during the Third World Symposium on Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension held in Venice, Italy, it was decided to maintain the general architecture and philosophy of the Evian classification. However, some modifications have been proposed, mainly to abandon the term "primary pulmonary hypertension" and to replace it with "idiopathic pulmonary hypertension"; to reclassify pulmonary veno-occlusive disease and pulmonary capillary hemangiomatosis; to update risk factors and associated conditions for pulmonary arterial hypertension and to propose guidelines in order to improve the classification of congenital systemic-to-pulmonary shunts.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of bosentan (125 or 250 mg twice daily) on echocardiographic and Doppler variables in 85 patients with World Health Organization class III or IV pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH)., Background: Bosentan, an orally active dual endothelin-receptor antagonist, improves symptoms, exercise capacity, and hemodynamics in patients with PAH., Methods: Patients had primary pulmonary hypertension (84%) or PAH associated with connective tissue disease. Of these, 29 patients received placebo and 56 received bosentan (1:2 randomization). Six-minute walk tests and echocardiograms were performed at baseline and after 16 weeks of treatment., Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in the placebo and bosentan groups, and echocardiographic and Doppler findings were consistent with marked abnormalities of right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) structure and function that were due to PAH. The treatment effect on 6-min walking distance was 37 m in favor of bosentan (p = 0.036). Treatment effects of bosentan compared with placebo on other parameters were as follows: Doppler-derived cardiac index = +0.4 l/min/m(2) (p = 0.007), LV early diastolic filling velocity = +10.5 cm/s (p = 0.003), LV end-diastolic area = +4.2 cm(2) (p = 0.003), LV systolic eccentricity index = -0.12 (p = 0.047), RV end-systolic area = -2.3 cm(2) (p = 0.057), RV:LV diastolic areas ratio = -0.64 (p = 0.007), Doppler RV index = -0.06 (p = 0.03), and percentage of patients with an improvement in pericardial effusion score = 17% (p = 0.05)., Conclusions: Bosentan improves RV systolic function and LV early diastolic filling and leads to a decrease in RV dilation and an increase in LV size in patients with PAH.

Objectives: We sought to determine the factors associated with long-term survival in patients with primary pulmonary hypertension (PPH) treated with continuous epoprostenol infusion., Background: Epoprostenol improves survival in patients with PPH in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III or IV. However, some patients do not benefit from epoprostenol and must be considered for lung transplantation. The best timing for listing these patients on a lung transplantation program is currently unknown., Methods: Between December 1992 and January 2001, 178 patients with PPH in NYHA functional class III or IV were treated with epoprostenol. The 6-min walk test (WT) and right-sided heart catheterization were performed at baseline, after three months on epoprostenol and thereafter once a year., Results: Overall survival rates at one, two, three, and five years were 85%, 70%, 63%, and 55%, respectively. On univariate analysis, the baseline variables associated with a poor outcome were a history of right-sided heart failure, NYHA functional class IV, 6-min WT or=12 mm Hg, and mean pulmonary artery pressure <65 mm Hg. On multivariate analysis, including both baseline variables and those measured after three months on epoprostenol, a history of right-sided heart failure, persistence of NYHA functional class III or IV at three months, and the absence of a fall in total pulmonary resistance of >30%, relative to baseline, were associated with poor survival., Conclusions: Survival of patients with PPH treated with epoprostenol depends on the severity at baseline, as well as the three-month response to therapy. These findings suggest that lung transplantation should be considered in a subset of patients who remain in NYHA functional class III or IV or in those who cannot achieve a significant hemodynamic improvement after three months of epoprostenol therapy, or both.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of beraprost sodium, an orally active prostacyclin analogue, in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II and III patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH)., Background: Pulmonary arterial hypertension is a life-threatening disease for which continuous intravenous infusion of prostacyclin has been proven effective. However, this treatment is associated with serious complications arising from the complex delivery system., Methods: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 130 patients with PAH were randomized to the maximal tolerated dose of beraprost (median dose 80 microg four times a day) or to placebo for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the change in exercise capacity assessed by the 6-min walk test. Secondary end points included changes in Borg dyspnea index, cardiopulmonary hemodynamics and NYHA functional class., Results: Patients treated with beraprost improved exercise capacity and symptoms. The difference between treatment groups in the mean change of 6-min walking distance at week 12 was 25.1 m (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8 to 48.3, p = 0.036). The difference in the mean change of Borg dyspnea index was -0.94 (95% CI: -1.63 to -0.24, p = 0.009). In the sub-group of patients with primary pulmonary hypertension, the difference in the mean change of 6-min walking distance was 46.1 m (95% CI: 3.0 to 89.3, p = 0.035). Cardiopulmonary hemodynamics and NYHA functional class had no statistically significant changes. Drug-related adverse events were common in the titration phase and decreased in the maintenance period., Conclusions: Beraprost improves exercise capacity and symptoms in NYHA functional class II and III patients with PAH and, in particular, in those with primary pulmonary hypertension.

Objectives: The purpose of this time-domain study was to compare pulmonary artery (PA) pulse pressure and wave reflection in chronic pulmonary thromboembolism (CPTE) and primary pulmonary hypertension (PPH)., Background: Pulmonary artery pressure waveform analysis provides a simple and accurate estimation of right ventricular afterload in the time-domain. Chronic pulmonary thromboembolism and PPH are both responsible for severe pulmonary hypertension. Chronic pulmonary thromboembolism and PPH predominantly involve proximal and distal arteries, respectively, and may lead to differences in PA pressure waveform., Methods: High-fidelity PA pressure was recorded in 14 patients (7 men/7 women, 46 +/- 14 years) with CPTE (n = 7) and PPH (n = 7). We measured thermodilution cardiac output, mean PA pressure (MPAP), PA pulse pressure (PAPP = systolic - diastolic PAP) and normalized PAPP (nPAPP = PPAP/MPAP). Wave reflection was quantified by measuring Ti, that is, the time between pressure upstroke and the systolic inflection point (Pi), deltaP, that is, the systolic PAP minus Pi difference, and the augmentation index (deltaP/PPAP)., Results: At baseline, CPTE and PPH had similar cardiac index (2.4 +/- 0.4 vs. 2.5 +/- 0.5 l/min/m2), mean PAP (59 +/- 9 vs. 59 +/- 10 mm Hg), PPAP (57 +/- 13 vs. 53 +/- 13 mm Hg) and nPPAP (0.97 +/- 0.16 vs. 0.89 +/- 0.13). Chronic pulmonary thromboembolism had shorter Ti (90 +/- 17 vs. 126 +/- 16 ms, p < 0.01) and higher deltaP/PPAP (0.26 +/- 0.01 vs. 0.09 +/- 0.07, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Our study indicated that: 1) CPTE and PPH with severe pulmonary hypertension had similar PA pulse pressure, and 2) wave reflection is elevated in both groups, and CPTE had increased and anticipated wave reflection as compared with PPH, thus suggesting differences in the pulsatile component of right ventricular afterload.