{"title":"观点:是时候降低肺血管阻力增加的临界值了吗?是的","authors":"G. Triantafyllou, B. Maron","doi":"10.21693/1933-088x-22.1.62","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n For decades, pulmonary hypertension (PH) used to be defined by a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥25 mm Hg; however, this criterion was not based on data that were systematically collected. With the availability of contemporary datasets however, it was evident that the upper limit of normal mPAP was ∼20 mm Hg, which is also the level of mPAP above which adverse outcomes increase. In addition, it is now evident that the specificity of mPAP >20 mm Hg to denote precapillary pulmonary vascular disease could be enhanced by adding pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) to the precapillary PH definition. Finally, after characterizing large groups of normal individuals, akin to observations for mPAP, it was recently demonstrated that a PVR of ∼2.0 Wood units (WU) is the upper limit of normal, and the lower level associated with all-cause mortality in at-risk patients.\n \n \n \n The current hemodynamic criteria for PH are positioned to capture more patients compared to the classical definition, with particular implications for earlier diagnosis. Importantly, pulmonary vasodilator therapies have not been tested adequately in patients with mPAP <25 mm Hg or PVR between 2 to 3 WU and, thus, should not be administered in these patients. Mild PH is an active focus of clinical trial design; at present, these patients should be referred to expert PH centers earlier for individualized therapeutic planning.\n \n \n \n The revised definition of precapillary PH uses a PVR threshold of >2 WU. This value is evidence-based, and exceeding this threshold is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. This revision places focus on early diagnosis, close monitoring, and consideration for certain treatments. Further studies are needed that test the efficacy and safety of pulmonary arterial hypertension-specific therapy in precapillary PH patients with PVR 2 to 3 WU.\n","PeriodicalId":92747,"journal":{"name":"Advances in pulmonary hypertension","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"POINT: Is It Time to Lower the Cut-off for Increased Pulmonary Vascular Resistance? Yes\",\"authors\":\"G. Triantafyllou, B. Maron\",\"doi\":\"10.21693/1933-088x-22.1.62\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n For decades, pulmonary hypertension (PH) used to be defined by a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥25 mm Hg; however, this criterion was not based on data that were systematically collected. With the availability of contemporary datasets however, it was evident that the upper limit of normal mPAP was ∼20 mm Hg, which is also the level of mPAP above which adverse outcomes increase. In addition, it is now evident that the specificity of mPAP >20 mm Hg to denote precapillary pulmonary vascular disease could be enhanced by adding pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) to the precapillary PH definition. Finally, after characterizing large groups of normal individuals, akin to observations for mPAP, it was recently demonstrated that a PVR of ∼2.0 Wood units (WU) is the upper limit of normal, and the lower level associated with all-cause mortality in at-risk patients.\\n \\n \\n \\n The current hemodynamic criteria for PH are positioned to capture more patients compared to the classical definition, with particular implications for earlier diagnosis. Importantly, pulmonary vasodilator therapies have not been tested adequately in patients with mPAP <25 mm Hg or PVR between 2 to 3 WU and, thus, should not be administered in these patients. Mild PH is an active focus of clinical trial design; at present, these patients should be referred to expert PH centers earlier for individualized therapeutic planning.\\n \\n \\n \\n The revised definition of precapillary PH uses a PVR threshold of >2 WU. This value is evidence-based, and exceeding this threshold is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. This revision places focus on early diagnosis, close monitoring, and consideration for certain treatments. Further studies are needed that test the efficacy and safety of pulmonary arterial hypertension-specific therapy in precapillary PH patients with PVR 2 to 3 WU.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":92747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in pulmonary hypertension\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in pulmonary hypertension\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21693/1933-088x-22.1.62\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in pulmonary hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21693/1933-088x-22.1.62","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
几十年来,肺动脉高压(PH)的定义是平均肺动脉压(mPAP)≥25毫米汞柱;然而,这一标准并不是基于系统收集的数据。然而,随着当代数据集的可用性,很明显,正常mPAP的上限为~20 mm Hg,这也是mPAP的水平,超过该水平,不良后果会增加。此外,现在很明显,mPAP>20mm Hg表示毛细血管前肺血管疾病的特异性可以通过在毛细血管前PH定义中添加肺血管阻力(PVR)来增强。最后,在对大组正常个体进行表征后,类似于mPAP的观察结果,最近证明,约2.0 Wood单位(WU)的PVR是正常的上限,也是与高危患者全因死亡率相关的下限。与经典定义相比,目前的PH血液动力学标准能够捕获更多的患者,对早期诊断具有特殊意义。重要的是,肺血管舒张剂治疗尚未在mPAP 2 WU患者中得到充分测试。这个值是基于证据的,超过这个阈值会导致不良的临床结果。这一修订将重点放在早期诊断、密切监测和考虑某些治疗上。需要进一步的研究来测试肺动脉高压特异性治疗PVR2-3WU的毛细血管前PH患者的有效性和安全性。
POINT: Is It Time to Lower the Cut-off for Increased Pulmonary Vascular Resistance? Yes
For decades, pulmonary hypertension (PH) used to be defined by a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥25 mm Hg; however, this criterion was not based on data that were systematically collected. With the availability of contemporary datasets however, it was evident that the upper limit of normal mPAP was ∼20 mm Hg, which is also the level of mPAP above which adverse outcomes increase. In addition, it is now evident that the specificity of mPAP >20 mm Hg to denote precapillary pulmonary vascular disease could be enhanced by adding pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) to the precapillary PH definition. Finally, after characterizing large groups of normal individuals, akin to observations for mPAP, it was recently demonstrated that a PVR of ∼2.0 Wood units (WU) is the upper limit of normal, and the lower level associated with all-cause mortality in at-risk patients.
The current hemodynamic criteria for PH are positioned to capture more patients compared to the classical definition, with particular implications for earlier diagnosis. Importantly, pulmonary vasodilator therapies have not been tested adequately in patients with mPAP <25 mm Hg or PVR between 2 to 3 WU and, thus, should not be administered in these patients. Mild PH is an active focus of clinical trial design; at present, these patients should be referred to expert PH centers earlier for individualized therapeutic planning.
The revised definition of precapillary PH uses a PVR threshold of >2 WU. This value is evidence-based, and exceeding this threshold is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. This revision places focus on early diagnosis, close monitoring, and consideration for certain treatments. Further studies are needed that test the efficacy and safety of pulmonary arterial hypertension-specific therapy in precapillary PH patients with PVR 2 to 3 WU.