Saleh, Khaled Musa Mohammad

ABSTRACTPortopulmonary hypertension (PoPH), a type of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) in patients with liver disease, is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The relationship between cardiopulmonary hemodynamics, PAH therapy, and survival in PoPH remains unclear. We performed a retrospective cohort study of PoPH patients from the international pulmonary hypertension (PH) meta‐registry, PVRI GoDeep. PAH was defined by a mean pulmonary arterial pressure > 20 mmHg, pulmonary arterial wedge pressure ≤ 15 mmHg, and a pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) > 2 Wood Units. PoPH diagnoses were assigned by each center's PH specialist based on international guidelines at the time of enrollment. 246 incident PoPH patients met eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis, equally split between males (51%) and females (49%), with a median age of 54 years. When compared to both patients with IPAH and those with other subtypes of PAH (not classified as PoPH or IPAH), those with PoPH had significantly lower 5‐year survival rates (46% vs. 68% vs. 65%, log‐rank p < 0.001). Amongst the PoPH patients, however, there was no significant difference in 5‐year survival when dichotomized by disease severity, either by a PVR of 5 Wood Units or a CI of 2.5 L/min/m2. Treatment of the PoPH patients with PAH‐targeted therapies was associated with significantly higher 5‐year survival rates compared to those not receiving such treatments, as shown by Kaplan–Meier analysis. This survival benefit was observed for PDE5i (50% vs. 34%, log‐rank p = 0.029), ERA (58% vs. 34%, log‐rank p < 0.001), and the combination of PDE5i and/or ERA (51% vs. 22%, log‐rank p < 0.001), as well as any PAH‐targeting treatment (50% vs. 26%, log‐rank p = 0.007). Corresponding survival advantage was noted when including only PoPH patients with MELD Score ≥ 13. PoPH is a disease with significantly worse long‐term survival than other PAH subtypes, but targeted PAH therapy is associated with a robust survival benefit. Survival did not differ across high‐risk PVR and cardiac index thresholds, suggesting the factors that influence prognosis and survival in PoPH may be unique as compared to other PAH subtypes, and warrant further investigation.

Abstract Introduction Sex-based differences in morbidity and mortality for pulmonary hypertension (PH) are insufficiently addressed in current research. However, recognizing these differences is crucial for optimal clinical management and improving outcomes. This study assesses the effect of sex on survival among PH patients, while accounting for disease severity, comorbidities, treatment, and race. Methods We analyzed data from the PVRI GoDeep meta-registry, including all incident patients with complete hemodynamic profiles. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for various confounders. Analyses included both PAH and non-PAH groups and risk assessment by the ESC/ERS 2022, REVEAL lite 2, and COMPERA 4-strata scores. All analyses were performed using R (The R Foundation). Results A total of 19,663 incident PH patients were included in the analysis, with 5,581 patients (28%) diagnosed with Group 1 PH and a median age of 64 years [IQR: 52-73]. Among these, male patients (8,704, 44%) had a significantly higher mortality risk than female patients across the entire cohort and within all PH subtypes. The adjusted hazard ratio for mortality in male versus female patients was 1.391 [95% CI: 1.260-1.536] in the overall population and 1.404 [95% CI: 1.264-1.561] for those with PAH. This survival difference was consistent across various severity levels, age groups, and in the presence of comorbidities such as obesity and cardiovascular diseases, as well as among those receiving PAH-specific therapies as well as patients who remained without treatment during the observation period. Notably, male disadvantage in survival was observed in low, intermediate, and high-risk categories for ESC/ERS 2022, REVEAL lite 2, and COMPERA scores but not within REVEAL 2.0, which includes male sex as a non-modifiable risk factor. Racial analysis revealed a greater mortality risk for males among White patients, with no significant differences noted in Black or Asian populations. Conclusion Our PVRI GoDeep meta-registry analysis demonstrates that male PH patients face higher mortality risk across both PAH and non-PAH groups, independent of disease etiology, age, severity, comorbidities, and treatment factors, with this risk amplified in White patients. These findings suggest that male sex should be further considered as a risk factor to refine predictive models for survival in PH.

Objectives: Our preliminary data and observational studies suggested an increasing “off label” use of oral midodrine as a vasopressor sparing agent in various groups of critically ill patients, including those with sepsis. We designed this clinical trial to evaluate the feasibility of use of midodrine hydrochloride in early sepsis to reduce the duration for IV vasopressors and decrease ICU and hospital length of stay. Design: Pilot, two-center, placebo-controlled, double blinded randomized clinical trial. Setting: Medical ICUs at Mayo Clinic Rochester and Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi were the study sites. Patients and Methods: Adult patients (≥ 18 yr old) were included within 24 hours of meeting the Sepsis-3 definition if the mean arterial pressure remained less than 70 mm Hg despite receiving timely antibiotics and initial IV fluid bolus of 30 cc/kg. Intervention: Three doses of 10 mg midodrine versus placebo were administered. Measurements and Main Results: Total 32 patients were randomized into midodrine (n = 17) and placebo groups (n = 15). There were no major differences in baseline variables between the groups except for higher baseline creatinine in the midodrine group (2.0 ± 0.9 mg/dL) versus placebo group (1.4 ± 0.6 mg /dL), p = 0.03. The median duration of IV vasopressor requirement was 14.5 ± 8.1 hours in midodrine group versus 18.8 ± 7.1 hours in the placebo group, p value equals to 0.19. Patients in the midodrine group needed 729 ± 963 norepinephrine equivalent compared with 983 ± 1,569 norepinephrine equivalent in the placebo group, p value equals to 0.59. ICU length of stay was 2.29 days (interquartile range, 1.65–3.9 d) in the midodrine group, compared with 2.45 days (interquartile range, 1.6–3.2 d) in the placebo group, p value equals to 0.36. No serious adverse events were observed in either group. Conclusions: Phase II clinical trial powered for clinical outcomes (duration of vasopressor use, need for central venous catheter, and ICU and hospital length of stay) is justified.