肺静脉闭塞症的疗效和风险评估。

IF 4.3 3区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
ERJ Open Research Pub Date : 2024-01-15 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1183/23120541.00612-2023
Athénaïs Boucly, Sabina Solinas, Antoine Beurnier, Xavier Jaïs, Sophia Keddache, Mélanie Eyries, Andrei Seferian, Mitja Jevnikar, Anne Roche, Sophie Bulifon, Arnaud Bourdin, Ari Chaouat, Vincent Cottin, Laurent Bertoletti, Laurent Savale, Marc Humbert, Olivier Sitbon, David Montani
{"title":"肺静脉闭塞症的疗效和风险评估。","authors":"Athénaïs Boucly, Sabina Solinas, Antoine Beurnier, Xavier Jaïs, Sophia Keddache, Mélanie Eyries, Andrei Seferian, Mitja Jevnikar, Anne Roche, Sophie Bulifon, Arnaud Bourdin, Ari Chaouat, Vincent Cottin, Laurent Bertoletti, Laurent Savale, Marc Humbert, Olivier Sitbon, David Montani","doi":"10.1183/23120541.00612-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Pulmonary veno-occlusive disease (PVOD) is a rare and severe subtype of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Although European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society (ESC/ERS) guidelines advise assessing PAH severity at baseline and during follow-up, no existing risk assessment methods have been validated for PVOD. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors, examine the impact of treatment strategies and evaluate risk assessment methods for PVOD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study analysed all incident PVOD patients included in the French Pulmonary Hypertension Registry between 2006 and 2021. Survival was assessed based on initial treatment strategy and risk status and compared to a matched (age, sex, pulmonary vascular resistance) PAH group. Six risk assessment methods (number of four low-risk and three noninvasive low-risk variables, ESC/ERS guidelines three-strata and four-strata models, REVEAL 2.0 and Lite 2) were applied at baseline and early follow-up, and their accuracy was compared using Harrell's c-statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 327 included PVOD patients, survival rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86%, 50% and 27%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that only 6-min walk distance was associated with survival, with no significant difference based on initial treatment strategy. All six risk assessment methods could discriminate mortality risk, and the ESC/ERS four-strata model was the most accurate at both baseline and follow-up (C-index 0.64 and 0.74). PVOD survival rates were consistently lower than PAH when comparing baseline risk status using the ESC/ERS four-strata model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PVOD is associated with poor outcomes, and initial treatment strategies do not significantly affect survival. Risk assessment methods can be useful in predicting survival for PVOD patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":11739,"journal":{"name":"ERJ Open Research","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10789263/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes and risk assessment in pulmonary veno-occlusive disease.\",\"authors\":\"Athénaïs Boucly, Sabina Solinas, Antoine Beurnier, Xavier Jaïs, Sophia Keddache, Mélanie Eyries, Andrei Seferian, Mitja Jevnikar, Anne Roche, Sophie Bulifon, Arnaud Bourdin, Ari Chaouat, Vincent Cottin, Laurent Bertoletti, Laurent Savale, Marc Humbert, Olivier Sitbon, David Montani\",\"doi\":\"10.1183/23120541.00612-2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Pulmonary veno-occlusive disease (PVOD) is a rare and severe subtype of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Although European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society (ESC/ERS) guidelines advise assessing PAH severity at baseline and during follow-up, no existing risk assessment methods have been validated for PVOD. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors, examine the impact of treatment strategies and evaluate risk assessment methods for PVOD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study analysed all incident PVOD patients included in the French Pulmonary Hypertension Registry between 2006 and 2021. Survival was assessed based on initial treatment strategy and risk status and compared to a matched (age, sex, pulmonary vascular resistance) PAH group. Six risk assessment methods (number of four low-risk and three noninvasive low-risk variables, ESC/ERS guidelines three-strata and four-strata models, REVEAL 2.0 and Lite 2) were applied at baseline and early follow-up, and their accuracy was compared using Harrell's c-statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 327 included PVOD patients, survival rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86%, 50% and 27%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that only 6-min walk distance was associated with survival, with no significant difference based on initial treatment strategy. All six risk assessment methods could discriminate mortality risk, and the ESC/ERS four-strata model was the most accurate at both baseline and follow-up (C-index 0.64 and 0.74). PVOD survival rates were consistently lower than PAH when comparing baseline risk status using the ESC/ERS four-strata model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PVOD is associated with poor outcomes, and initial treatment strategies do not significantly affect survival. Risk assessment methods can be useful in predicting survival for PVOD patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11739,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERJ Open Research\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10789263/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERJ Open Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00612-2023\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERJ Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00612-2023","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介肺静脉闭塞症(PVOD)是肺动脉高压(PAH)的一种罕见且严重的亚型。尽管欧洲心脏病学会/欧洲呼吸学会(ESC/ERS)指南建议在基线和随访期间评估 PAH 的严重程度,但现有的风险评估方法尚未对 PVOD 进行验证。本研究旨在确定预后因素、检查治疗策略的影响以及评估 PVOD 患者的风险评估方法:该研究分析了 2006 年至 2021 年期间纳入法国肺动脉高压登记处的所有 PVOD 患者。根据初始治疗策略和风险状况评估生存率,并与匹配的(年龄、性别、肺血管阻力)PAH 组进行比较。在基线和早期随访中采用了六种风险评估方法(四种低风险变量和三种无创低风险变量的数量、ESC/ERS指南中的三阶层和四阶层模型、REVEAL 2.0和Lite 2),并使用Harrell's c统计量对其准确性进行了比较:在纳入的 327 例 PVOD 患者中,1、3 和 5 年的存活率分别为 86%、50% 和 27%。多变量分析表明,只有 6 分钟步行距离与存活率相关,而初始治疗策略与存活率无显著差异。所有六种风险评估方法都能区分死亡风险,而ESC/ERS四层模型在基线和随访时都是最准确的(C指数分别为0.64和0.74)。在使用ESC/ERS四层模型比较基线风险状况时,PVOD的存活率一直低于PAH:结论:PVOD 与不良预后相关,初始治疗策略对生存率影响不大。风险评估方法有助于预测 PVOD 患者的生存率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Outcomes and risk assessment in pulmonary veno-occlusive disease.

Introduction: Pulmonary veno-occlusive disease (PVOD) is a rare and severe subtype of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Although European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society (ESC/ERS) guidelines advise assessing PAH severity at baseline and during follow-up, no existing risk assessment methods have been validated for PVOD. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors, examine the impact of treatment strategies and evaluate risk assessment methods for PVOD patients.

Methods: The study analysed all incident PVOD patients included in the French Pulmonary Hypertension Registry between 2006 and 2021. Survival was assessed based on initial treatment strategy and risk status and compared to a matched (age, sex, pulmonary vascular resistance) PAH group. Six risk assessment methods (number of four low-risk and three noninvasive low-risk variables, ESC/ERS guidelines three-strata and four-strata models, REVEAL 2.0 and Lite 2) were applied at baseline and early follow-up, and their accuracy was compared using Harrell's c-statistic.

Results: Among the 327 included PVOD patients, survival rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86%, 50% and 27%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that only 6-min walk distance was associated with survival, with no significant difference based on initial treatment strategy. All six risk assessment methods could discriminate mortality risk, and the ESC/ERS four-strata model was the most accurate at both baseline and follow-up (C-index 0.64 and 0.74). PVOD survival rates were consistently lower than PAH when comparing baseline risk status using the ESC/ERS four-strata model.

Conclusion: PVOD is associated with poor outcomes, and initial treatment strategies do not significantly affect survival. Risk assessment methods can be useful in predicting survival for PVOD patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ERJ Open Research
ERJ Open Research Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
273
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: ERJ Open Research is a fully open access original research journal, published online by the European Respiratory Society. The journal aims to publish high-quality work in all fields of respiratory science and medicine, covering basic science, clinical translational science and clinical medicine. The journal was created to help fulfil the ERS objective to disseminate scientific and educational material to its members and to the medical community, but also to provide researchers with an affordable open access specialty journal in which to publish their work.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信