Reddy, Yogesh

Background: Group 1 pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) is treated with three main drug classes: prostacyclin analogs (PCAs), endothelin receptor antagonists, and nitric oxide pathway drugs. PCAs may be administered via parenteral (intravenous (IV), subcutaneous (SQ)) or oral/inhaled routes. The role of parenteral versus non-parenteral PCAs in contemporary PH practice remains unclear. Objectives: To compare contemporary hemodynamic and survival outcomes between parenteral and non-parenteral PCA use. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with WHO Group 1 PAH, who underwent a right heart catheterization (RHC) at Mayo Clinic. Diagnosis required mPAP was ≥25 mm Hg, documented chart diagnosis and initiation of PAH therapy. Echocardiographic and repeat RHC parameters were collected and only patients started on PCA therapy were included. Patients were grouped based on intiiated PCA route: parenteral (IV/SQ) vs non-parenteral routes (oral/inhaled). Hemodynamic changes (post-pretreatment) were compared using t-tests and ANOVA for parenteral vs non-parenteral PCA. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves, and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Of 144 patients initiated on PCA after the first RHC, 89 (62%) received parenteral and 55 (38%) non-parenteral PCA.. At baseline, patients who started on parenteral PCA had more severe disease with higher mean PAP, RAP and PVR. On follow-up, parenteral PCAs led to greater reductions in mean PAP and RAP, with no differences in PVR, TPR, or CO changes. Survival was worse with parenteral PCA use even after adjusting for comorbidities and baseline hemodynamics (HR 1.93; 95% CI 1.17-3.18; p=0.009). Discussion: Parenteral PCAs were more often used in patients with more severe pulmonary vascular disease. Despite greater hemodynamic improvements, parenteral PCAs were associated with worse survival, likely due to more severe disease at baseline. Further research is needed to understand the role of PCA route in guiding treatment strategies.

Introduction: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterized by pulmonary edema, hypoxia and systemic inflammation. The presence and clinical implications of a high cardiac output state in patients with ARDS remain unknown given the lack of invasive hemodynamic monitoring in most patients with ARDS. Hypothesis: A subset of patients with ARDS will have high output heart failure with high cardiac output and elevated pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PAWP) representing a unique subphenotype of ARDS. Methods: Patients from the Comparison of Two Fluid-Management Strategies in Acute Lung Injury (FACTT) Trial were stratified according to baseline cardiac output states and filling pressures: HOLHF (high-output with left heart failure) was defined as cardiac index (CI) ≥ 4 L/min/m 2 and PAWP ≥ 15 mmHg; HOnoLHF (high-output without left heart failure) as CI ≥ 4 L/min/m 2 and PAWP < 15 mmHg; and NOHO (non-high-output) as CI < 4 L/min/m 2 . Hemodynamics, oxygenation, metabolic demand (VO 2 ) and clinical outcomes were compared across groups. Results: Of the 399 patients included, high-output states were present in 52% of all patients (Figure 1). High-output cohorts demonstrated higher myocardial workload, lower systemic vascular resistance (SVR), lower pulsatile arterial load, higher VO 2 and more impaired systemic O 2 utilization despite the highest peripheral O 2 delivery compared to NOHO (Table). Among the high-output cohorts, the HOLHF cohort demonstrated higher right ventricular stroke work (25.2 ± 12.1 vs. 20.3 ± 12.3, P<0.001), worse A-a gradient (326.0 ± 136.5 vs. 276.1 ± 114.7, P=0.048) and higher VO 2 (382.3 ± 234.2 vs. 289.8 ± 171.7, P<0.001) compared to HOnoLHF. Increasing cardiac output was individually related to decreasing SVR (r=-0.742, P<0.001) and increasing VO 2 (r=0.565, P<0.001) (Figure 2). When adjusted, both variables remained strongly related to increasing cardiac output (P<0.001). There were no significant differences among the cohorts with respect to refractory hypoxia and mortality. Conclusions: High-output states in ARDS are prevalent and underrecognized. Such states appear to be driven by arterial vasodilatation and heightened VO 2 with additional manifestations of increased myocardial workload and inefficient peripheral utilization with impaired systemic O 2 utilization. Whether specific strategies to mitigate the high output state might improve gas exchange, hypoxia and outcomes in patients with HOLHF and ARDS requires further study.

Introduction: Obesity is rising in prevalence worldwide and co-exists in patients with group 1 pulmonary hypertension (PH). Clinical and hemodynamic implications of having obesity in group 1 PH remain unknown. Hypothesis . We hypothesized that obese patients with group 1 PH would exhibit worse hemodynamic parameters including higher right atrial pressure (RAP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) compared to non-obese patients. Aims: To compare hemodynamic parameters obtained from right heart catheterization (RHC) and echo among group 1 PH with and without obesity. Methods: We evaluated a cohort of patients with group 1 PH who underwent RHC at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 2002 to 2021 with diagnosis adjudicated by detailed chart review and initiation of pulmonary vasodilator therapy. Patients with a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥ 25 mm who were clinically diagnosed with WHO Group 1 PH and recommended pulmonary vasodilator therapy initiation were included. Results: Of 822 participants with group 1 PH, obesity was common, present in 325 patients (40%). There was no difference in survival among patients with and without obesity (HR 1.15; 95% CI 0.95-1.38; p=.15). Obese patients had higher RAP (12.8 ± 6.8 vs 10.4 ± 6.5 mm of Hg, p<.0001) and cardiac output (5.2 ± 2.2 vs 4.5 ± 1.8 L/min, p<.0001) compared to non-obese group (Table 1). Despite having group 1 PH, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) was higher with obesity (13.8 ± 6.3 vs 12.2 ± 6.5 mm of Hg, p=.001) compared to those without obesity. Along with higher PCWP, there was less pulmonary vascular disease severity with obese group 1 PH, with higher pulmonary artery compliance (PAC, 1.65 ± 1.06 vs 1.38 ± 0.84 mL/mm of Hg, p=.0002) and lower pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR, 7.9 ± 5.2 vs 9.4 ± 7.7 Wood Units, p=.0007). After accounting for age, gender, diabetes mellitus and systemic hypertension, the RAP, cardiac output, PAC and PCWP remained significantly higher, and PVR remained lower in obese patients (p<0.05 for all). Conclusions: Comorbid obesity is associated with higher biventricular filling pressures, higher cardiac output and lower pulmonary vascular disease severity in otherwise clinically diagnosed group 1 PH. These findings call for further study of whether targeting obesity with novel weight loss drugs such as glucagon like peptide 1 receptor agonists or other drugs can lower biventricular filling pressures and associated pulmonary hypertension in group 1 PH with obesity.

Abstract Aims Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous condition, and tissue congestion manifested by oedema is not present in all patients. We compared clinical characteristics, exercise capacity, and outcomes in patients with HFpEF with and without oedema. Methods and results This study was a post hoc analysis of pooled data of patients with left ventricular ejection fraction of ≥50% enrolled in the DOSE, CARRESS-HF, RELAX, ATHENA, ROSE, INDIE, and NEAT trials. Patients were dichotomized by the severity of oedema. Cox proportional hazard regression and generalized linear regression models were used to assess associations between oedema, symptoms, and clinical outcomes. The ambulatory cohort included 393 patients (228 with and 165 without oedema), and the hospitalized cohort included 338 patients (249 with ≥moderate oedema and 89 with mild or none). Among ambulatory patients, patients with oedema had a higher body mass index (35.2 kg/m2 [inter-quartile range, IQR 30.5, 41.6] vs. 31.6 kg/m2 [IQR 27.9, 36.3], P &lt; 0.001), greater burden of co-morbidities, higher intravascular pressures estimated on physical examination (elevated jugular venous pressure: 50% vs. 24.7%, P &lt; 0.001), poorer renal function (creatinine: 1.2 mg/dL [IQR 0.9, 1.5] vs. 1 mg/dL [IQR 0.8, 1.3], P = 0.003), and lower peak VO2 (adjusted mean difference −1.04 mL/kg/min, 95% confidence interval [−1.71, −0.37], P &lt; 0.003). Among hospitalized patients, despite greater in-hospital fluid/weight loss in the ≥moderate oedema group, there was no difference in the improvement in dyspnoea by the visual analogue scale or well-being visual analogue scale from baseline to 3–4 days and no statistically significant difference in the rate of 60 day rehospitalization/death (adjusted hazard ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval [0.87, 2.39], P = 0.156). Conclusions Patients with HFpEF and oedema display higher body mass, greater burden of co-morbidities, and more severe exercise intolerance, but clinical responses to treatment appear similar. Further research is required to better understand the nature of volume distribution in different HFpEF phenotypes.