|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2003; 41:1028-1035, doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02964-9 © 2003 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |
* Division of Respiratory and Critical Care Physiology and Medicine and Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Research and Education Institute, HarborUCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California, USA
Manuscript received May 31, 2002; revised manuscript received November 16, 2002, accepted December 4, 2002.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. James E. Hansen, St. Johns Cardiovascular Research Center, 1124 West Carson Street, Box 405, Torrance, California 90509-2910, USA.
jimandbev{at}cox.net
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
BACKGROUND: Patients with PPH are often difficult to diagnose until several years after the onset of symptoms. Despite the seriousness of the disorder, the diagnosis of PPH is often delayed because it is unsuspected and requires invasive measurements. Although PPH often causes abnormalities in resting lung function, these abnormalities have not been shown to be statistically significant when correlated with other measures of PPH severity.
METHODS: Resting lung mechanics and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide DLCO were assessed in 79 patients whose findings conformed to the classical diagnostic criteria of PPH and who had no evidence of secondary causes of pulmonary hypertension. These findings were correlated with severity of disease as assessed by cardiac catheterization, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing.
RESULTS: When PPH patients were first evaluated at our referral clinic, the DLCO and lung volumes were decreased in approximately three-quarters and one-half, respectively. The decreases in DLCO, and to a lesser extent lung volumes, correlated significantly with decreases in peak oxygen uptake (reflecting maximum cardiac output), peak oxygen pulse (reflecting maximum stroke volume), and anaerobic threshold (reflecting sustainable exercise capacity) and higher NYHA class.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PPH commonly have abnormalities in lung mechanics and DLCO levels that correlate significantly with disease severity. These measurements can be useful in evaluating patients with unexplained dyspnea and fatigue.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Several studies (612) have found that simple, noninvasive lung function measurements, especially the gas transfer index or diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), can also be abnormal in PPH patients. This is not surprising considering that the pathology of PPH primarily involves the small pulmonary arteries and capillaries, and that the DLCO is dependent on the access and transfer of inhaled carbon monoxide to the hemoglobin in the pulmonary capillaries. However, none of the above studies have shown significant correlations of DLCO with the severity of the disease as measured by New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, resting hemodynamic measurements, or cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) parameters. The CPET can be safely performed in PPH patients to: 1) detect patterns of gas exchange abnormalities that are typical of PPH, 2) quantify disease severity, and 3) identify the presence of right-to-left shunting (2,3,13,14). Specifically, the severity of PPH has been shown to be correlated with several CPET parameters, including peak O2 uptake (maximal aerobic capacity), peak O2 pulse, and anaerobic threshold (maximal sustainable exercise level) (2). We hypothesized that the DLCO, and perhaps other lung function measurements, would be significantly correlated with the severity of PPH assessed in other ways. Thus, in 79 patients with well-documented diagnoses of PPH and 20 control subjects, resting lung function measurements (including spirometric, lung volume, and DLCO values) were correlated with CPET parameters, resting hemodynamic variables (measured during cardiac catheterization), and NYHA symptom class.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
For comparison purposes, the CPET and resting lung function data of 20 sedentary age- and gender-matched control individuals, without detectable cardiorespiratory disorders, were measured during the same time period and analyzed.
Resting lung function measurements. Each patient underwent resting measurements of forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV), DLCO and effective alveolar volume (VA') using standard equipment and methodology meeting American Thoracic Society standards (15,16). Total lung capacity (TLC) was assessed by multiple breath nitrogen washout or plethysmographic measurements (17,18) in 41 patients.
CPET measurements. On the same day as resting lung function testing, each patient underwent CPET after familiarization with the exercise apparatus. The exercise protocol consisted of a progressively increasing work rate test to maximum tolerance on an electromagnetically braked cycle ergometer (2,3,12). Gas exchange was measured using the MedGrapics (St. Paul, Minnesota) CPET equipment that calculated heart rate, ventilation, CO2 output, O2 uptake, and other gas exchange variables, breath-by-breath (2,3,19). From these data, peak O2 uptake, anaerobic threshold, peak O2 pulse, and other parameters were analyzed by standard techniques (2,3,1922).
Calculation of percent predicted values. All resting lung function and CPET values were reported in absolute terms and normalized to percent of predicted (%pred). Predicted spirometry values were calculated using accepted equations for Caucasians, Hispanics, and Blacks (23), with Asian values considered equal to Blacks (24). Predicted DLCO and VA' were calculated using nonsmoker equations for Caucasians and Hispanics (25); and 0.93 and 0.88 of the Caucasian values for Asian and Black adult patients, respectively (26). Separate predicting equations were used for those under age 20 (27). Predicted DLCO values were corrected for measured hemoglobin concentration (28). All predicted values of CPET parameters were calculated as previously reported (2,3,19,29).
Statistical analyses. Parameters were expressed as mean ± SD, except where specifically noted. Individual values within two-tailed 95% confidence limits were considered normal. The Student-Newman-Keuls tests were performed for the repeated-measures analyses of variance. Individual linear regression analyses were performed. Pearson correlation coefficients were performed for all pulmonary function and exercise values, which were normally distributed, whereas Spearman rank correlation coefficients were performed for NYHA class. To ascertain the relative significance of resting lung function parameters to CPET parameters, multicollinearity analyses were done. Stepwise regression with forward selection and backward elimination was used, eliminating variables with an alpha of p > 0.05.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Resting lung function. Mean FVC (80 %pred), FEV1 (79 %pred), and VA' (83 %pred) showed mild, albeit highly significant reductions (p < 0.001 to p < 0.0001) in the PPH group (Table 2), with values ranging from 46% to 118%, 40% to 121%, and 55% to 126 %pred, respectively. Approximately half of the FVC measurements, as well as the FEV1, VA', and TLC values, were below 80 %pred, a level approximating the lower limit of normal (Fig. 1, upper). The FEV1/FVC was 98 ± 9 %pred (Table 2 and Fig. 2, upper left), providing evidence that airway obstruction is unusual in patients with PPH. In contrast, the proportional reductions in FEV1 and FVC indicate that a restrictive ventilatory defect was common (Table 2). In Figure 2, the regression lines (solid lines) of FEV1-versus-FVC and VA'-versus-TLC had nonsignificant intercepts (p > 0.05 vs. 0) and similar slopes to the line of identity (dotted lines, p > 0.05). The ratio of directly measured MVV to the FEV1 was 39 ± 9 (Fig. 2, upper right). This MVV/FEV1 ratio is similar to that found in the control group and in patients with obstructive lung disease, but lower than that found in patients with interstitial lung disease (19).
|
|
In contrast to the PPH patients who, on average, demonstrated mild restriction and moderate loss of diffusing capacity (Fig. 1 and 2), the resting lung function measurements in the controls were rarely outside of the 95% confidence limits for normal subjects (Table 2 and Fig. 1).
Despite the frequency of dyspnea as a symptom and the reduced FVC, FEV1, and MVV in the PPH patients, the ratio of peak exercise ventilation to MVV was significantly lower than that of the controls (Table 1), indicating that the decreased ventilatory capacity of the PPH group (Table 2) did not appear to limit their maximal exercise capacity.
Correlations of resting lung function to CPET, NYHA class, and resting cardiac catheterization measurements. Because patients and controls varied in age, gender, and size, and because all correlations were higher using %pred than with absolute values, only %pred values are used to establish correlation (Table 3). The DLCO was most highly correlated with peak O2 uptake (peak O2 uptake = 24 + 0.32 x DLCO, r = 0.42, SD = 12, n = 77, p = 0.0001), anaerobic threshold (anaerobic threshold = 31 + 0.43 x DLCO, r = 0.50, SD = 13, n = 76, p < 0.0001), and peak O2 pulse (peak O2 pulse = 32 + 0.41 x DLCO, r = 0.41, SD = 16, n = 77, p = 0.0002), although DLCO also correlated significantly with peak work rate and NYHA class. The relationships of %pred peak O2 uptake, anaerobic threshold, and peak O2 pulse to DLCO are shown for the PPH patients as shown in Figure 3. Although other PFT parameters (FVC, FEV1, MVV, and VA') correlated significantly with many CPET parameters and NYHA class, the highest r values and most significant p values were those for DLCO. There were no significant correlations of any resting lung function parameter with resting mean pulmonary artery pressure, cardiac output, pulmonary vascular resistance, or other values obtained during right heart catheterization.
|
|
Physiologic severity. The PPH patients were divided into four categories of severity (Table 4) according to their %pred peak O2 uptake: 1) mild, 65 to 79 %pred; 2) moderate, 50 to 64 %pred; 3) severe, 35 to 49 %pred; and 4) very severe, <35 %pred, as was done in a previous analysis of CPET in PPH patients (2). Clearly shown is the tendency to a progressive decrease in the resting lung function measures, especially DLCO, as the severity of PPH increases, using either %pred peak O2 uptake or NYHA class (p < 0.05 to p < 0.001).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Restriction, as evidenced by reductions in FEV1, FVC, VA', TLC, and DLCO have been reported in other series (6,10,30) of patients with PPH, but the degree and proportion of patients with these abnormalities are generally larger in our study. Because reference values derived from normal populations have a large variance for FVC and TLC, the finding of a VA' within normal limits in 58% of the PPH patients does not exclude a developing restrictive process in some patients, as sequential measurements were not made. However, any developing restrictive process, per se, is not a likely explanation for the exercise dyspnea of our PPH patients since, at peak exercise, PPH patients had both a lower ratio of ventilation relative to their resting MVV and a proportionally larger breathing reserve than did our control population. In addition, their symptoms were generally well out of proportion to their degree of ventilatory restriction.
The finding that the VA' measured by a single breath averaged 96% of the TLC measured by plethysmography or nitrogen washout, with a standard deviation of only 3%, is strong evidence against maldistribution of ventilation in the PPH patients. If maldistribution of ventilation were part of PPH, the TLC would have been considerably higher than the VA' In comparing resting lung function values in a normal population, ratio values have a much lower coefficient of variation than do absolute values (31). Therefore, the nearly universally normal FEV1/FVC ratio (Fig. 1) indicates that obstructive airways disease was uncommonly present in our patients with PPH. The fact that the FEV1/FVC was rarely increased and that the overall MVV-to-FEV1 ratio was not appreciably or significantly increased over the normal value of 40 (Fig. 2) is evidence against lung fibrosis with increased elastic recoil, as is commonly found in patients with interstitial lung disease (19). These resting lung function findings fit with those from other reports in PPH patients (68,10), except that prior reports did not find significant correlations between resting lung function and disease severity.
Probable causes of reduction in DLCO. Importantly, the overall reduction in mean resting DLCO in most of our PPH patients (Figs. 1 and 2, Table 2) strongly suggests that, even at rest, pulmonary capillary blood volume was reduced. This reduction fits the pathological findings typical of PPH, described by Meyrick and Reid (32)that is, muscularization of smaller, more peripheral pulmonary arteries, medial thickening of the muscular arteries, intimal thickening, and a reduction in peripheral vascular bed. The possible effect of smoking causing the low DLCO, values in the eight men in this study was investigated because the prediction equations of Miller et al. (25) indicate a reduction in DLCO in men, but not women, smokers. For these eight men, the DLCO were 77%, 75%, and 65% of predicted in the three never-smokers and 68%, 66%, 63%, 53%, and 49% in the ex-smokers. Using Millers predicting equations (25) for men smoking one and a half packs per day (though none of these five men had smoked this heavily), their % predicted DLCO all remained abnormal, increasing an average of 9%. Thus, smoking was unlikely to be more than a minor factor in the overall reduction in DLCO in this study. The reduction in DLCO cannot be attributed to maldistribution of ventilation, because the VA' (measured concurrently with the DLCO during 10-s breathholding at full inspiration) was approximately 96% of the separately measured TLC. Hence, all the study findings support the concept that the reduced DLCO in PPH patients must be attributable to a reduction in perfused pulmonary capillary bed rather than maldistribution of ventilation or anemia. Furthermore, the lung function findings in this study do not fit the pattern found in patients with interstitial lung disease and secondary pulmonary hypertension, as in such patients the restriction tends to be more severe, with the FEV1/FVC and MVV/FEV1 ratios abnormally increased (10,19).
Possible causes of restriction. What are the possible causes of lung restriction in PPH? The PPH patients were not more overweight than the controls or general population, and no evidence was observed for chest wall disease, lung fibrosis, pleural effusions, or left ventricular failure in these patients. Patients with severe left ventricular failure commonly have lung restriction (3234), but following heart transplant, the TLC may increase by 400 to 1,000 ml, presumably due to the fact that the transplanted heart is smaller (34). We conjecture that cardiomegaly with right ventricular hypertrophy and dilation may account for some of the reduction in lung volume in the PPH patients. Additionally, because lung expansion depends on the distensibility (compliance) of all lung tissues including the pulmonary vasculature, loss of the normal distensibility of the smaller arteries radiating out into the lung periphery may be an important factor causing lung restriction in these patients.
Clinical implications. The positive correlations of the DLCO, FVC, FEV1, and VA' values with multiple CPET parameters and NYHA class support the hypothesis that a close relationship exists between the processes that causes each to become abnormal (Table 4, Fig. 3). However, the greater proportional reduction in DLCO than in FVC (Fig. 2) and TLC in our PPH patients supports the findings that the primary pathological process involves the blood vessels of the lungs. These simple, safe, and patient-friendly resting lung function measurements can be clinically useful in suspecting (but not excluding) the diagnosis of PPH in patients who have unexplained dyspnea on exertion. Whether or not they are useful in following the course of the disease remains to be seen.
| Footnotes |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. M. Chin and L. J. Rubin Pulmonary arterial hypertension. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 22, 2008; 51(16): 1527 - 1538. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Anthi, R. F. Machado, M. L. Jison, A. M. Taveira-DaSilva, L. J. Rubin, L. Hunter, C. J. Hunter, W. Coles, J. Nichols, N. A. Avila, et al. Hemodynamic and Functional Assessment of Patients with Sickle Cell Disease and Pulmonary Hypertension Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., June 15, 2007; 175(12): 1272 - 1279. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Vonk-Noordegraaf, S. A. van Wolferen, J. T. Marcus, A. Boonstra, P. E. Postmus, J. W. L. Peeters, and A. J. Peacock Noninvasive assessment and monitoring of the pulmonary circulation Eur. Respir. J., April 1, 2005; 25(4): 758 - 766. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Sofia, M. Maniscalco, P. Carratu, and O. Resta End points for pulmonary arterial hypertension: a way backward Eur. Respir. J., November 1, 2004; 24(5): 890 - 891. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. McGoon, D. Gutterman, V. Steen, R. Barst, D. C. McCrory, T. A. Fortin, and J. E. Loyd Screening, Early Detection, and Diagnosis of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: ACCP Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines Chest, July 1, 2004; 126(1_suppl): 14S - 34S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |