Background: The clinical characteristics, hemodynamic changes and outcomes of lung disease-associated pulmonary hypertension (LD-PH) are poorly defined. Methods: A prospective cohort of PH patients undergoing initial hemodynamic assessment was collected, from which 51 patients with LD-PH were identified. Baseline characteristics and long-term survival were compared with 83 patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (iPAH). Results: Mean age ( ± standard deviation) of LD-PH patients was 64 ± 10 years, 30% were female and 78% were New York Heart Association class III-IV. The LD-PH group was older than the iPAH group (64 ± 10 vs 56 ± 18 years, respectively, P = 0.003) with a lower percentage of women (30% vs 70%, P = 0.007). LD-PH patients had smaller right ventricular sizes (P = 0.02) and less tricuspid regurgitation (P = 0.03) by echocardiogram, and lower mean pulmonary arterial pressures (mPAP) (P = 0.01) and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) (P = 0.001) at catheterization. Despite these findings, mortality was equally high in both groups (P = 0.16). 5-year survival was lower in patients with interstitial lung disease compared to those with obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.05). Among the LD-PH population, those with mild to moderately elevated mPAP and those with PVR < 7 Wood units demonstrated significantly improved survival (P = 0.04 and P = 0.001, respectively). Vasoreactivity was not associated with improved survival (P = 0.64). A PVR ≥7 Wood units was associated with increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval), 3.59 (1.27-10.19), P = 0.02). Conclusions: Despite less severe PH and less right heart sequelae, LD-PH has an equally poor clinical outcome when compared to iPAH. A PVR ≥7 Wood units in LD-PH patients was associated with 3-fold higher mortality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.