Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Right ventricular remodelling and long-term survival after pulmonary endarterectomy versus balloon pulmonary angioplasty in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Right ventricular remodelling and long-term survival after pulmonary endarterectomy versus balloon pulmonary angioplasty in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension
Do you wish to request the book?
Right ventricular remodelling and long-term survival after pulmonary endarterectomy versus balloon pulmonary angioplasty in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Right ventricular remodelling and long-term survival after pulmonary endarterectomy versus balloon pulmonary angioplasty in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension
2025
Overview
BackgroundPulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), while balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) is an alternative for inoperable patients. We aimed to compare right ventricular (RV) remodelling and late survival after PEA and BPA.MethodsIn this prospective observational cohort study, we performed echocardiography at baseline and follow-up in patients with CTEPH treated with PEA (n=54) or BPA (n=44) between 2011 and 2022.ResultsFollow-up echocardiography was performed at 5 months (IQR 4–7) after PEA and 3 months (IQR 2–4) after the last BPA. Both groups showed significant improvements in left ventricular end-systolic eccentricity index, RV basal diameter and RV fractional area change (RV FAC). Tricuspid regurgitation pressure decreased by 26±18 mm Hg after PEA and 13±21 mm Hg after BPA (p=0.02 for between-group difference). Tricuspid annular systolic excursion (TAPSE) decreased by 4±5 mm after PEA but increased by 1±4 mm after BPA (p<0.001). The TAPSE/systolic pulmonary artery pressure ratio improved similarly in both groups. Five-year survival was 96% (95% CI 86% to 99%) for PEA and 79% (95% CI 61% to 89%) for BPA (p=0.25). Change in RV FAC was an independent predictor of survival (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99, p=0.03).ConclusionsBoth PEA and BPA led to significant RV reverse remodelling, with no clear evidence of a difference in survival rates. Improvement in RV function, particularly RV FAC, was associated with better outcomes, highlighting the importance of RV recovery in CTEPH treatment.
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Cardiovascular Society,BMJ Publishing Group LTD
Subject
/ Angioplasty, Balloon - adverse effects
/ Angioplasty, Balloon - methods
/ Angioplasty, Balloon - mortality
/ Endarterectomy - adverse effects
/ Female
/ Heart
/ Humans
/ Hypertension, Pulmonary - diagnosis
/ Hypertension, Pulmonary - etiology
/ Hypertension, Pulmonary - mortality
/ Hypertension, Pulmonary - physiopathology
/ Hypertension, Pulmonary - surgery
/ Hypertension, Pulmonary - therapy
/ Male
/ Patients
/ pulmonary arterial hypertension
/ Pulmonary Artery - diagnostic imaging
/ Pulmonary Artery - physiopathology
/ Pulmonary Embolism - complications
/ Pulmonary Embolism - diagnosis
/ Pulmonary Embolism - mortality
/ Pulmonary Embolism - physiopathology
/ Pulmonary Embolism - surgery
/ Pulmonary Embolism - therapy
