Clinical Characteristics of Patients Undergoing Right Heart Catheterizations in Community Hospitals.

Background Recognition of precapillary pulmonary hypertension (PH) has significant implications for patient management. However, the low a priori chance to find this rare condition in community hospitals may create a barrier against performing a right heart catheterization (RHC). This could result in misclassification of PH and delayed diagnosis/treatment of precapillary PH. Therefore, we investigated patient characteristics and echocardiographic parameters associated with the decision whether to perform an RHC in patients with incident PH in 12 Dutch community hospitals. Methods and Results In total, 275 patients were included from the OPTICS (Optimizing PH Diagnostic Network in Community Hospitals) registry, a prospective cohort study with patients with incident PH; 157 patients were diagnosed with RHC (34 chronic thromboembolic PH, 38 pulmonary arterial hypertension, 81 postcapillary PH, 4 miscellaneous PH), while 118 patients were labeled as probable postcapillary PH without hemodynamic confirmation. Multivariable analysis showed that older age (>60 years), left ventricular diastolic dysfunction grade 2-3, left atrial dilatation were independently associated with the decision to not perform an RHC, while presence of prior venous thromboembolic events or pulmonary arterial hypertension-associated conditions, right atrial dilatation, and tricuspid regurgitation velocity ≥3.7 m/s favor an RHC performance. Conclusions Older age and echocardiographic parameters of left heart disease were independently associated with the decision to not perform an RHC, while presence of prior venous thromboembolic events or pulmonary arterial hypertension-associated conditions, right atrial dilation, and severe PH on echocardiography favored an RHC performance. As such, especially elderly patients may be at an increased risk of diagnostic delays and missed diagnoses of treatable precapillary PH, which could lead to a worse prognosis.

Imatinib in patients with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The major complication of COVID-19 is hypoxaemic respiratory failure from capillary leak and alveolar oedema. Experimental and early clinical data suggest that the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor imatinib reverses pulmonary capillary leak. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial was done at 13 academic and non-academic teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Hospitalised patients (aged ≥18 years) with COVID-19, as confirmed by an RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, requiring supplemental oxygen to maintain a peripheral oxygen saturation of greater than 94% were eligible. Patients were excluded if they had severe pre-existing pulmonary disease, had pre-existing heart failure, had undergone active treatment of a haematological or non-haematological malignancy in the previous 12 months, had cytopenia, or were receiving concomitant treatment with medication known to strongly interact with imatinib. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral imatinib, given as a loading dose of 800 mg on day 0 followed by 400 mg daily on days 1-9, or placebo. Randomisation was done with a computer-based clinical data management platform with variable block sizes (containing two, four, or six patients), stratified by study site. The primary outcome was time to discontinuation of mechanical ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours, while being alive during a 28-day period. Secondary outcomes included safety, mortality at 28 days, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. All efficacy and safety analyses were done in all randomised patients who had received at least one dose of study medication (modified intention-to-treat population). This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2020-001236-10). FINDINGS: Between March 31, 2020, and Jan 4, 2021, 805 patients were screened, of whom 400 were eligible and randomly assigned to the imatinib group (n=204) or the placebo group (n=196). A total of 385 (96%) patients (median age 64 years [IQR 56-73]) received at least one dose of study medication and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. Time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 h was not significantly different between the two groups (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·95 [95% CI 0·76-1·20]). At day 28, 15 (8%) of 197 patients had died in the imatinib group compared with 27 (14%) of 188 patients in the placebo group (unadjusted HR 0·51 [0·27-0·95]). After adjusting for baseline imbalances between the two groups (sex, obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease) the HR for mortality was 0·52 (95% CI 0·26-1·05). The HR for mechanical ventilation in the imatinib group compared with the placebo group was 1·07 (0·63-1·80; p=0·81). The median duration of invasive mechanical ventilation was 7 days (IQR 3-13) in the imatinib group compared with 12 days (6-20) in the placebo group (p=0·0080). 91 (46%) of 197 patients in the imatinib group and 82 (44%) of 188 patients in the placebo group had at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event. The safety evaluation revealed no imatinib-associated adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The study failed to meet its primary outcome, as imatinib did not reduce the time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours in patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen. The observed effects on survival (although attenuated after adjustment for baseline imbalances) and duration of mechanical ventilation suggest that imatinib might confer clinical benefit in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, but further studies are required to validate these findings. FUNDING: Amsterdam Medical Center Foundation, Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek/ZonMW, and the European Union Innovative Medicines Initiative 2.

Noninvasive Prediction of Elevated Wedge Pressure in Pulmonary Hypertension Patients Without Clear Signs of Left-Sided Heart Disease: External Validation of the OPTICS Risk Score.

Background Although most newly presenting patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) have elevated pulmonary artery wedge pressure, identification of so-called postcapillary PH can be challenging. A noninvasive tool predicting elevated pulmonary artery wedge pressure in patients with incident PH may help avoid unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures. Methods and Results A combination of clinical data, ECG, and echocardiographic parameters was used to refine a previously developed left heart failure risk score in a retrospective cohort of pre- and postcapillary PH patients. This updated score (renamed the OPTICS risk score) was externally validated in a prospective cohort of patients from 12 Dutch nonreferral centers the OPTICS network. Using the updated OPTICS risk score, the presence of postcapillary PH could be predicted on the basis of body mass index ≥30, diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, dyslipidemia, history of valvular surgery, sum of SV1 (deflection in V1 in millimeters) and RV6 (deflection in V6 in millimeters) on ECG, and left atrial dilation. The external validation cohort included 81 postcapillary PH patients and 66 precapillary PH patients. Using a predefined cutoff of >104, the OPTICS score had 100% specificity for postcapillary PH (sensitivity, 22%). In addition, we investigated whether a high probability of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, assessed by the H2FPEF score (obesity, atrial fibrillation, age >60 yrs, ≥2 antihypertensives, E/e' >9, and pulmonary artery systolic pressure by echo >35 mmHg), similarly predicted the presence of elevated pulmonary artery wedge pressure. High probability of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (H2FPEF score ≥6) was less specific for postcapillary PH. Conclusions In a community setting, the OPTICS risk score can predict elevated pulmonary artery wedge pressure in PH patients without clear signs of left-sided heart disease. The OPTICS risk score may be used to tailor the decision to perform invasive diagnostic testing.

Oral or IV prednisolone in the treatment of COPD exacerbations: a randomized, controlled, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with systemic corticosteroids for exacerbations of COPD results in improvement in clinical outcomes. On hospitalization, corticosteroids are generally administered IV. It has not been established whether oral administration is equally effective. We conducted a study to demonstrate that therapy with oral prednisolone was not inferior to therapy with IV prednisolone using a double-blind, double-dummy design. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for an exacerbation of COPD were randomized to receive 5 days of therapy with prednisolone, 60 mg IV or orally. Treatment failure, the primary outcome, was defined as death, admission to the ICU, readmission to the ICU because of COPD, or the intensification of pharmacologic therapy during a 90-day follow-up period. RESULTS: A total of 435 patients were referred for a COPD exacerbation warranting hospitalization; 107 patients were randomized to receive IV therapy, and 103 to receive oral therapy. Overall treatment failure within 90 days was similar, as follows: IV prednisolone, 61.7%; oral prednisolone, 56.3% (one-sided lower bound of the 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.8%). There were also no differences in early (ie, within 2 weeks) treatment failure (17.8% and 18.4%, respectively; one-sided lower bound of the 95% CI, -9.4%), late (ie, after 2 weeks) treatment failure (54.0% and 47.0%, respectively; one-sided lower bound of the 95% CI, -5.6%), and mean (+/- SD) length of hospital stay (11.9 +/- 8.6 and 11.2 +/- 6.7 days, respectively). Over 1 week, clinically relevant improvements were found in spirometry and health-related quality of life, without significant differences between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Therapy with oral prednisolone is not inferior to IV treatment in the first 90 days after starting therapy. We suggest that the oral route is preferable in the treatment of COPD exacerbations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00311961.