Risk factors for portopulmonary hypertension in patients with cirrhosis: A prospective, multicenter study

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1979381/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Risk factors for portopulmonary hypertension in patients with cirrhosis: A prospective, multicenter study

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1979381/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background Measurement of the tricuspid regurgitation pressure gradient (TRPG) by echocardiography is recommended as the most objective examination for the detection of portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH). This prospective study aimed to identify factors associated with a high TRPG in patients with cirrhosis and develop a screening method for identifying patients most likely to benefit from investigation with echocardiography.

Results Four hundreds and eighty-six patients with cirrhosis underwent Doppler echocardiography, and were analyzed in the present study. Of the 486 patients, 51 (10.5%) had TRPG ≥35 mmHg. The median BNP was 39.5 (range, 3.3–712.0) pg/mL. Ninety-one (18.7%) patients reported shortness of breath. Multivariate analysis identified female, shortness of breath, and BNP ≥49 pg/mL as independent factors for TRPG ≥35 mmHg. The risk score for predicting TRPG ≥35 mmHg was calculated: risk score = −3.230 + 0.622 × gender (female: 1, male: 0) + 1.403 × shortness of breath (presence: 1, absence: 0) + 0.726 × BNP (≥ 49pg/mL: 1, <49 pg/mL: 0). An optimal cut-off risk score for predicting TRPG ≥35 mmHg was −1.882 (AUC, 0.731; sensitivity, 68.6%; specificity, 70.6%). The prevalence of TRPG ≥35 mmHg in patients with a risk score ≥−1.882 (21.5%) was significantly higher than that in patients with a risk score <−1.882 (5.0%) (p = 7.02 × 10⁻⁸).

Conclusions We clarified the characteristics of patients with suspected PoPH, and developed a scoring model for identifying patients at high risk of PoPH, which may have utility in selecting patients with cirrhosis that may benefit from echocardiography.

Pulmonary hypertension

Pulmonary artery hypertension

Portopulmonary hypertension

Liver cirrhosis

Portal hypertension

Echocardiography

Brain natriuretic peptide

Shortness of breath

Female

Tricuspid regurgitation pressure gradient

In chronic liver diseases, such as chronic hepatitis B or C virus (HBV or HCV) infection, alcoholic liver disease, fatty liver disease, primary biliary cholangitis, and autoimmune disease, hepatic inflammation persists over a long period contributing to the development of liver fibrosis. Without appropriate therapeutic intervention, chronic liver disease may progress to cirrhosis. A proportion of patients with cirrhosis develop portal hypertension and various extrahepatic complications including ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, and esophagogastric varices. Portal hypertension may be complicated by portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH), a rare but serious condition characterized by increased pulmonary vascular resistance associated with increased risks of right heart failure and death [1–4].

The prevalence of PoPH in patients with cirrhosis or portal hypertension is reportedly 1–6% [5–11]. A study in a population in the USA demonstrated that 66 (5.3%) of 1,235 patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation had a diagnosis of PoPH, with no correlation observed between PoPH and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores, an index of liver functional reserve [12]. A separate study from the USA reported that female gender and autoimmune hepatitis were risk factors for PoPH and that the MELD score was not correlated with the incidence of PoPH [13], corroborating the above report. In contrast, studies from Eastern countries (Japan and China) have reported higher rates of PoPH in HBV- and/or HCV-positive patients [9–11], indicating that the incidence and characteristics of PoPH in patients with cirrhosis may differ among countries/regions or races.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) has been defined as a mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) of ≥ 25 mmHg [14, 15], However, the World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension in 2018 proposed a revision of the diagnostic criterion for PAH from a mPAP of ≥ 25 mmHg to > 20 mmHg [16], Pulmonary hypertension (PH) was classified into five groups according to the Nice Classification, with PH with a pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP) of ≤ 15 mmHg classified as PH group 1 (i.e., PAH). In this group, PoPH is defined as PAH associated with presence of portal hypertension [14–16].

The prognosis of patients with PoPH is poor. The 5-year survival rate of untreated patients with PoPH is reportedly 14%, with 54% of patients dying within one year of diagnosis [17]. Compared to patients with idiopathic PAH, patients with PoPH have been reported to have a poorer prognosis due to delays in diagnosis and treatment [18]. Meanwhile, survival has reportedly been prolonged by the development of drugs that reduce the pulmonary artery pressure, with a 5-year survival rate of 67% in patients with PoPH who underwent liver transplantation [19].

Therefore, there is global consensus regarding the importance of early diagnosis of PoPH and initiation of treatment for the management of patients with cirrhosis or portal hypertension [20]. However, the incidence of PoPH in patients with cirrhosis is relatively low and there are no established guidelines concerning screening methods for PoPH in patients with cirrhosis. Moreover, the diagnosis of PoPH is often clinically challenging partly as electrocardiographic findings are normal in 37% of patients with PoPH [21] and respiratory symptoms such as shortness of breath may be absent, particularly in the early stage of the disease. Therefore, there is an urgent clinical need for the development of simple and sensitive screening methods for PoPH in patients with cirrhosis. The definitive diagnosis of PoPH requires right heart catheterization; however, the use of such invasive procedures in all patients with suspected portal hypertension is challenging in routine clinical practice. Non-invasive examinations have been reported as auxiliary methods for predicting PoPH. Subjective symptoms (such as shortness of breath), serum brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) measurement, and measurement of the main pulmonary artery diameter have been reported have utility in the early detection of PoPH [22–24]. Measurement of the tricuspid regurgitation pressure gradient (TRPG) values by echocardiography is recommended as the most objective examination for the detection of PoPH [15, 20].

This prospective, multicenter study aimed to identify factors associated with a high TRPG in patients with cirrhosis and develop a screening method for identifying patients most likely to benefit from investigation with echocardiography.

Subjects

This was a prospective, 21-multicenter study conducted in Japan (UMIN registration no. 000040426). Between January 2020 and March 2022, 630 Japanese patients with cirrhosis were consecutively recruited into the present study. The inclusion criteria for the analysis were (1) age ≥20 years, (2) diagnosis of cirrhosis, and (3) consent for TRPG measurement using Doppler echocardiography. The exclusion criteria were: (i) uncontrollable hepatocellular carcinoma; (ii) chronic respiratory disease; left ventricular heart disease, such as a left ventricular ejection fraction <50%, moderate or severe valvular disease of the left heart, and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction; (iv) atrial fibrillation; (v) chronic pulmonary embolism; (vi) congenital heart disease; (vii) human immunodeficiency virus infection; (viii) blood disease; (ix) sarcoidosis; (x) thyroid disease; and (xi) connective tissue disease. The present study was conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines established in the 2013 Helsinki Declaration and was approved by the ethics committee of Nippon Medical School (approval no. B-2019-098). Patients were given the option to abstain from participating in this prospective study.

Evaluation of liver functional reserve

Cirrhosis was diagnosed through imaging (abdominal computed tomography and/or ultrasonography) or liver biopsy. Child–Pugh classification and ALBI grade were used to assess liver functional reserve. ALBI grade was calculated based on serum albumin and total bilirubin values using the following formula: ALBI score = [log10 bilirubin (µmol/L) × 0.66] + [albumin (g/L) × −0.085] [25].

Evaluation of TRPG values

Doppler echocardiography was performed according to commonly used guidelines [15, 26]. TRPG value was estimated by calculating the right ventricular to right atrial pressure gradient during systole; that is, the modified Bernoulli equation was used to calculate the gradients from the velocities: TRPG (mmHg) = 4 × [tricuspid regurgitant velocity (TRV; m/sec)] ². An mPAP value of 25 mmHg on right heart catheterization was considered equivalent to a TRPG value of 36 mmHg on echocardiography [27]. However, the cut-off value of TRPG for predicting PoPH varies among previous reports, ranging from 31.36 mmHg to 46.24 mmHg [20]. With reference to the above reports [20, 27]. the cut-off value for predicting PoPH was defined as TRPG ≥35 mmHg in the present study.

Pulmonary artery catheterization

In patients with high TRPG who consented to examination for a definitive diagnosis of PoPH, right heart catheterization was performed to measure pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), as previously described [22, 28]. The procedure was performed using the cuff method to determine pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP). A pulmonary arterial catheter (Thermodilution catheter; Nipro, Osaka, Japan) was connected to a monitor for pressure and cardiac output (CO) recording, with the latter being determined using the thermodilution technique. A cold 10 mL saline solution of known temperature was injected into the right atrium from the proximal port of a thermistor-tipped catheter inserted into the pulmonary artery. Blood was cooled while the injection solution passed into the pulmonary artery via the ventricle. The resultant temperature drop was measured using a thermistor at the catheter tip, after which a thermodilution curve and CO were calculated using a computer. Measurements were repeated five times consecutively, with the average CO recorded after exclusion of the lowest and highest values. Considering the hemodynamic changes with respiration, pressure measurements were consistently performed at the end of expiration. Pressures were measured in mmH₂O, with the zero reference for correction at the midthoracic level. Thereafter, water column pressure was converted into mercury column pressure. Pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) was calculated using the following equation: PVR = (PAP − PAWP) / CO.

Statistical analyses

Continuous variables are presented as medians and ranges. Categorical variables are presented as numbers. Fisher’s exact test and Mann–Whitney U test were used to compare two groups, as appropriate. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify factors that were significantly and independently associated with TRPG ≥35 mmHg. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was generated in order to analyze the cut-off values of BNP that most rationally predicted TRPG ≥35 mmHg. A P value of <0.05 was regarded as statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 23.0 (IBM Japan, Tokyo, Japan).

Patient characteristics

A total of 630 patients with cirrhosis underwent Doppler echocardiography to measure TRPG. Sixty-one patients were excluded from this analysis due to a lack of data on BNP measurements. A further 83 patients were excluded due to the presence of left heart failure or atrial fibrillation. Thus, 486 patients were analyzed in this study with baseline characteristics shown in Table 1. The patients comprised 265 males and 221 females, with a median age of 72 (range, 22–92) years. The median Child–Pugh score was 6 (range, 5–13) points. The numbers of patients with Child–Pugh class A, B, and C were 307, 125, and 54, respectively. The median ALBI score was −2.42 (range, −3.67–0.14). The median TRPG value was 22.0 (range, 4.0–91.2) mmHg. Of the 486 patients, 51 (10.5%) had TRPG ≥35 mmHg (Supplementary Fig. 1). The median BNP level was 39.5 (range, 3.3–712.0) pg/mL (Supplementary Fig. 2). Ninety-one (18.7%) patients reported shortness of breath.

Comparison of baseline characteristics between patients with TRPG <35mmHg and ≥35mmHg

Table 2 shows a comparison of baseline characteristics between patients with TRPG <35 mmHg and ≥35 mmHg. There were no significant differences in Child–Pugh score, ALBI score, or prothrombin time between the two groups (p = 0.699, 0.326, and 0.194, respectively; Fig. 1a–c). BNP levels were higher in patients with TRPG ≥35 mmHg (p = 1.15 × 10⁻³; Fig. 1d). The proportion of females among patients with TRPG ≥35 mmHg was higher than that among patients with TRPG <35 mmHg (p = 0.025; Fig. 1e). The prevalence of reported shortness of breath was higher in patients with TRPG ≥35 mmHg (p = 3.76 × 10⁻⁶; Fig. 1f).

An optimal cut-off BNP value for predicting TRPG ≥35 mmHg and prevalence of TRPG ≥35mmHg according to the cut-off BNP value

Using the ROC curve analysis, the optimal cut-off value of BNP for predicting TRPG ≥35 mmHg was 49.0 pg/mL [area under the curve (AUC), 0.639; sensitivity, 62.8%; specificity, 60.5%]. Next, patients were divided into two groups using this cut-off BNP value. The prevalence of TRPG ≥35 mmHg in patients with BNP ≥49.0 pg/mL was significantly higher than that in patients with BNP <49.0 pg/mL (14.9% vs.7.4%; p = 0.010).

Factors associated with TRPG ≥35 mmHg

To investigate factors associated with TRPG ≥35 mmHg, multiple regression analysis was performed. Shortness of breath (odds ratio [OR] = 4.067, p = 8.81 × 10⁻⁶), BNP ≥49 pg/mL (OR = 2.066, p = 0.019), and female gender (OR = 1.862, p = 0.047) were significantly and independently associated with TRPG ≥35 mmHg (Table 3). Based on these results, a risk score model for predicting TRPG ≥35 mmHg was constructed: risk score = −3.230 + 0.622 × gender (female: 1, male: 0) + 1.403 × shortness of breath (presence: 1, absence: 0) + 0.726 × BNP (≥ 49pg/mL: 1, <49 pg/mL: 0).

An optimal risk score to predict TRPG ≥35 mmHg

The optimal cut-off value of the risk score for predicting TRPG ≥35 mmHg was −1.882 (AUC, 0.731; sensitivity, 68.6%; specificity, 70.6%; Fig. 2a). Next, patients were divided into two groups using this cut-off risk score. The prevalence of TRPG ≥35 mmHg in the patients with a risk score ≥−1.882 was significantly higher than that in patients with a risk score <−1.882 (21.5% vs. 5.0%; p = 7.02 × 10⁻⁸; Fig. 2b).

Prevalence of TRPG ≥35 mmHg according to risk scores

Fig. 3 shows the prevalence of TRPG ≥35 mmHg according to risk scores (range, −3.230 to −0.479) in patients with cirrhosis. Among patients with a risk score <−1.882, the prevalence of TRPG ≥35 mmHg was 4 of 139 (2.9%) with −3.230, 5 of 84 (6.0%) with −2.504, and 7 of 100 (7.0%) with −2.608. Meanwhile, among patients with a risk score ≥−1.882, the prevalence of TRPG ≥35 mmHg was 12 of 72 (16.7%) with −1.882, 4 of 19 (21.1%) with −1.827, 6 of 27 (22.2%) with −1.205, 7 of 23 (30.4%) with −1.101, and 6/22 (27.3%) with −0.479.

Characteristics including risk scores in patients diagnosed with PoPH by pulmonary artery catheterization

Of the 51 patients with TRPG ≥35 mmHg, 15 consented to pulmonary artery catheterization for a definitive diagnosis of PoPH. All15 patients had a risk score ≥−1.882 and were found to have PoPH (Supplementary Table 1).

PoPH is a serious complication of cirrhosis and portal hypertension; however, the diagnosis of PoPH in routine clinical practice is challenging due to a low prevalence and subclinical progression. The 6th World Symposium of Pulmonary Hypertension recommended a diagnostic algorithm for PH based on past history, symptoms and laboratory results suggestive of PH, and echocardiography. These guidelines further recommended examinations for left heart failure and pulmonary disorders and consultation with a specialist in cases where PH is strongly suspected [20]. Ideally, all patients with cirrhosis or portal hypertension should undergo echocardiography for investigation of PoPH [20]; however, the cost-effectiveness of this approach would be low in clinical settings. Therefore, the present study aimed to clarify the characteristics of patients with suspected PoPH and to identify patients who may benefit from further investigation with echocardiography. The results of the present study revealed that shortness of breath, female gender, and high BNP levels were significant, independent factors for predicting TRPG ≥ 35 mmHg (i.e., PoPH).

Principal symptoms of PAH include exertional dyspnea, fatigue, and chest pain [20]. Although these symptoms are not specific to PAH, medical consultations with inquiry regarding shortness of breath are important opportunities to detect PoPH [22, 29]. This study demonstrated that shortness of breath was most strongly associated with high TRPG (i.e., PoPH). Thus, patients with shortness of breath even in the absence of cardiovascular disease and associated symptoms should undergo echocardiography. However, 19% of patients with PoPH do not report shortness of breath [22]. The present study revealed that 45.1% (23/51) of patients with TRPG ≥ 35 mmHg reported shortness of breath. If shortness of breath is absent, it is important to consider other factors (such as BNP levels and gender, as shown in this study) so as not to overlook patients with high TRPG.

BNP measurements have no utility in diagnosing PoPH, although elevated BNP levels are indicative of right heart overload and poor overall prognosis [20]. However, it has been reported that BNP measurement has utility in the early diagnosis of PoPH in patients with biliary atresia, with a cut-off value of BNP for predicting asymptomatic PoPH of 29.1 pg/mL [23]. A study comprising 157 patients with decompensated cirrhosis or portal hypertension reported that BNP levels were significantly higher in patients with high right ventricular systolic pressures, thereby predicting PoPH [8]. In this study, BNP levels were significantly and independently associated with high TRPG. However, there are few reports on the diagnostic performance of BNP in PoPH. Given that BNP is an objective indicator that can be easily measured, further studies are required to evaluate the potential utility of BNP measurement in the diagnosis of PoPH.

A study from Japan reported that female gender, higher shortest diameter of the inferior vena cava, presence of portosystemic shunts of ≥ 5 mm, and lower blood urea nitrogen levels were independent factors related to PoPH in 130 patients with portal hypertension [24]. It has also been reported from studies conducted in other countries that the incidence of PoPH is significantly higher in female patients than in male patients [10, 13, 30, 31]. These results are consistent with the findings of the present study that female gender was independently associated with TRPG ≥ 35 mmHg. Factors related to sex hormone metabolism have been posited as factors influencing the higher prevalence of PoPH in females. As for heritable PAH, bone morphogenetic receptor type 2 (BMPR2) mutations have been shown to be a risk factor for the onset of PAH [32, 33], with BMPR2 mutations more frequent in females [34]. CYP1B1 metabolizes estrogen and estrone, and the CYP1B1 Asn453Ser polymorphism has been shown to be associated with PAH in females with BMPR2 mutations [35]. Sex hormone abnormalities caused by variants in the genes that encode estrogen receptor 1 and aromatase (CYP19A1), which produces estradiol, estrone, and 16α- hydroxyestrone, are potentially associated with PoPH in patients with advanced liver disease [30].

PoPH is primarily observed in patients with cirrhosis complicated by portal hypertension. There have been a number of reports on the relationships of liver functional reserve and etiology with PoPH. Several studies have reported that liver functional reserve is not correlated with the frequency of complications related to PoPH [6, 12, 13, 31]. The present study also found no correlation between high TRPG and Child–Pugh class or ALBI grade, which are commonly used indices for the assessment of liver functional reserve. Concerning the relationship between PoPH and etiology, PoPH has been reported to be frequently observed in patients with autoimmune hepatitis or primary biliary cholangitis [6, 8, 31, 31, 36]. Further, there have been reports that PoPH is often observed in HCV-positive or HBV-positive patients in China [9, 10] and in HCV-positive patients in Japan [11]. Such differences may be attributable to differences in the primary etiology of cirrhosis among countries or regions. In this study, patients with autoimmune hepatitis or primary biliary cholangitis accounted for the highest proportion (15.4%) of patients in the high TRPG group (Supplementary Fig. 3); however, etiology was not associated with high TRPG. This finding requires further validation in cohorts from countries and regions other than Japan.

There are several limitations of the present study. First, a definitive diagnosis of PoPH had not been made in many patients as right heart catheterization was not performed in all patients. Accordingly, we simply analyzed the characteristics of patients suspected to have PoPH based on TRPG values. Notably, this study revealed that all 15 patients with a risk score ≥ − 1.882 met the criteria for a diagnosis of PoPH using right heart catheterization, although this number of patients was small. Next, while this study was prospective, individual physicians may have performed echocardiography mainly in patients with suspected PoPH. In addition, subjects were selected based on the presence of cirrhosis rather than portal hypertension. Therefore, selection bias increasing the frequency of patients with high TRPG values could not be definitively excluded. As it is difficult to perform hepatic vein catheterization for determining the presence and severity of portal hypertension in all patients, the association between the presence or severity of PoPH and the severity of portal hypertension remains unclear.

In conclusion, we clarified the characteristics of patients with suspected PoPH (TRPG ≥ 35 mmHg) in patients with cirrhosis who underwent echocardiography. We developed a scoring model for identifying patients at high risk of PoPH, which may have utility in selecting patients with cirrhosis that may benefit from echocardiography in clinical practice.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest associated with this manuscript.

Author contribution

All authors provided critical revisions to the study manuscript, and approved the final version submitted for publication. Masanori Atsukawa, Kaori-Shioda Koyano, Toru Ishikawa, Hidenori Toyoda, Koichi Takaguchi, Tsunamasa Watanabe, Kentaro Matsuura, Chikara Ogawa, Atsushi Hiraoka, Hironao Okubo, Masakuni Tateyama, Haruki Uojima, Akito Nozaki, Makoto Chuma, Keizo Kato, Shigeru Mikami, Joji Tani, Asahiro Morishita, Kazuhito Kawata, Yoshihiro Furuichi, Tomomi Okubo, Tadamichi Kawano, Taeang Arai, Naoto Kawabe, Naohiro Kawamura, Tadashi Ikegami, Makoto Nakamuta, Ryuta Shigefuku, Motoh Iwasa, Yasuhito Tanaka and Masaru Hatano collected data. Masanori Atsukawa, Toshifumi Tada, Masaru Hatano and Katsuhiko Iwakiri contributed to the study design. Masanori Atsukawa and Chisa Kondo analyzed the data. Masanori Atsukawa and Akihito Tsubota contributed to the interpretation of the results and the drafting of the manuscript.

Salerno F, Gerbes A, Ginès P, et al. Diagnosis, prevention and treatment of hepatorenal syndrome in cirrhosis. Gut. 2007;56(9):1310–8.
Hervé P, Lebrec D, Brenot F, et al. Pulmonary vascular disorders in portal hypertension. Eur Respir J. 1998;11(5):1153–66.
Krowka MJ, Fallon MB, Kawut SM, et al. International Liver Transplant Society Practice Guidelines: Diagnosis and Management of Hepatopulmonary Syndrome and Portopulmonary Hypertension. Transplantation. 2016;100(7):1440–52.
Rodríguez-Roisin R, Krowka MJ, Hervé P, et al. ERS Task Force Pulmonary-Hepatic Vascular Disorders (PHD) Scientific Committee. Pulmonary-Hepatic vascular Disorders (PHD). Eur Respir J. 2004;24(5):861–80.
Savale L, Watherald J, Sitbon O. Portopulmonary Hypertension. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;38(5):651–61.
Atsukawa M, Tsubota A, Hatano M, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of portopulmonary hypertension in cirrhotic patients who underwent both hepatic vein and pulmonary artery catheterization. Hepatol Res. 2020;50(11):1244–54.
Kawut SM, Taichman DB, Ahya VN, et al. Hemodynamics and survival of patients with portopulmonary hypertension. Liver Transpl. 2005;11(9):1107–11.
Hayashi R, Kogiso T, Kikuchi N, et al. Portopulmonary hypertension and the risk of high right ventricular systolic pressure in liver transplant candidates. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(4):e0267125.
Chen HS, Xing SR, Xu WG, et al. Portopulmonary hypertension in cirrhotic patients: Prevalence, clinical features and risk factors. Exp Ther Med. 2013;5(3):819–24.
Shao Y, Yin X, Qin T, et al. Prevalence and Associated Factors of Portopulmonary Hypertension in Patients with Portal Hypertension: A Case-Control Study. Biomed Res Int. 2021;2021:5595614.
Kawaguchi T, Honda A, Sugiyama Y, et al. Association between the albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score and severity of portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH): A data-mining analysis. Hepatol Res. 2021;51(12):1207–18.
Krowka MJ, Swanson KL, Frantz RP, et al. Portopulmonary hypertension: Results from a 10-year screening algorithm. Hepatology. 2006;44(6):1502–10.
Kawut SM, Krowka MJ, Trotter JF, et al. Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease Study Group. Clinical risk factors for portopulmonary hypertension. Hepatology. 2008;48(1):196–203.
Simonneau G, Montani D, Celermajer DS, et al. Haemodynamic definitions and updated clinical classification of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2019;53(1):1801913.
Galiè N, Humbert M, Vachiery JL, et al. 2015 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension: The Joint Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS): Endorsed by: Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC), International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT). Eur Heart J. 2016;37(1):67–119.
Thomas CA, Anderson RJ, Condon DF, et al.: Diagnosis and Management of Pulmonary Hypertension in the Modern Era: Insights from the 6th World Symposium. Pulm Ther. 2020;6(1):9–22.
Swanson KL, Wiesner RH, Nyberg SL, et al. Survival in portopulmonary hypertension: Mayo Clinic experience categorized by treatment subgroups. Am J Transplant. 2008;8(11):2445–53.
Krowka MJ, Miller DP, Barst RJ, et al. Portopulmonary hypertension: a report from the US-based REVEAL Registry. Chest. 2012;141(4):906–15.
Austin MJ, McDougall NI, Wendon JA, et al. Safety and efficacy of combined use of sildenafil, bosentan, and iloprost before and after liver transplantation in severe portopulmonary hypertension. Liver Transpl. 2008;14(3):287–91.
Frost A, Badesch D, Gibbs JSR, et al. Diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2019;53(1):1801904.
Kuo PC, Plotkin JS, Johnson LB, et al. Distinctive clinical features of portopulmonary hypertension. Chest. 1997;112(4):980–6.
Robalino BD, Moodie DS. Association between primary pulmonary hypertension and portal hypertension: analysis of its pathophysiology and clinical, laboratory and hemodynamic manifestations. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17(2):492–8.
Yoshimaru K, Matsuura T, Takahashi Y, et al. The efficacy of serum brain natriuretic peptide for the early detection of portopulmonary hypertension in biliary atresia patients before liver transplantation. Pediatr Transpl. 2018;22(5):e13203.
Ishikawa T, Egusa M, Kawamoto D, et al. Screening for portopulmonary hypertension using computed tomography-based measurements of the main pulmonary artery and ascending aorta diameters in patients with portal hypertension. Hepatol Res. 2022;52(3):255–68.
Johnson PJ, Berhane S, Kagebayashi C, et al. Assessment of liver function in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a new evidence-based approach-the ALBI grade. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(6):550–8.
Rudski LG, Lai WW, Afilalo J, et al. Guidelines for the echocardiographic assessment of the right heart in adults: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography endorsed by the European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, and the Canadian Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010;23(7):685–713.
Sawada N, Kawata T, Daimon M, et al. Detection of Pulmonary Hypertension with Systolic Pressure Estimated by Doppler Echocardiography. Int Heart J. 2019;60(4):836–44.
Gorrasi J, Pazos A, Florio L, et al. Cardiac output measured by transthoracic echocardiography and Swan-Ganz catheter. A comparative study in mechanically ventilated patients with high positive end-expiratory pressure. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2019;31(4):474–82.
Hadengue A, Benhayoun MK, Lebrec D, et al. Pulmonary hypertension complicating portal hypertension: prevalence and relation to splanchnic hemodynamics. Gastroenterology. 1991;100(2):520–8.
Al-Naamani N, Krowka MJ, Forde KA, et al. Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease Study Group. Estrogen Signaling and Portopulmonary Hypertension: The Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease Study (PVCLD2). Hepatology. 2021;73(2):726–37.
Roberts KE, Fallon MB, Krowka MJ, et al, Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease Study Group. Genetic risk factors for portopulmonary hypertension in patients with advanced liver disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2009;179(9):835–42.
International PPH, Consortium, Lane KB, Machado RD, Pauciulo MW, et al. Heterozygous germline mutations in BMPR2, encoding a TGF-beta receptor, cause familial primary pulmonary hypertension. Nat Genet. 2000;26(1):81–4.
Deng Z, Morse JH, Slager SL, et al. Familial primary pulmonary hypertension (gene PPH1) is caused by mutations in the bone morphogenetic protein receptor-II gene. Am J Hum Genet. 2000;67(3):737–44.
Larkin EK, Newman JH, Austin ED, et al. Longitudinal analysis casts doubt on the presence of genetic anticipation in heritable pulmonary arterial hypertension. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(9):892–6.
Austin ED, Cogan JD, West JD, et al. Alterations in oestrogen metabolism: implications for higher penetrance of familial pulmonary arterial hypertension in females. Eur Respir J. 2009;34(5):1093–9.
Li J, Zhuang Q, Zhang X, Zheng Y, Qiao Z, Zhang J, Shen X, et al. Prevalence and Prognosis of Portopulmonary Hypertension in 223 Liver Transplant Recipients. 2018;2018:9629570.

TABLE 1 Baseline characteristics of the 486 cirrhotic patients with cirrhosis

Factor	n = 486
Gender (Male/ Female)	265/ 221
Age (years)	72 (22–92)
Etiology (Alcohol/ HBV or HCV/ AIH or PBC/ NASH /others)	108/ 203/ 65/ 72/ 38
Platelets (×10³/mm³)	134 (18–476)
Total bilirubin (mg/dL)	0.9 (0.2–26.5)
Serum Albumin (g/dL)	3.7 (1.2–5.2)
Prothrombin time (%)	87.0 (18.0–167.9)
Child-Pugh score Child-Pugh class (A/ B/ C)	6 (5–13) 307/ 125/ 54
ALBI score	-2.42 (-3.67– 0.14)
TRPG (mmHg)	22.0 (4.0–91.2)
BNP (pg/mL)	39.5 (3.3–712.0)
Shortness of breath (Presence/ Absence)	91/ 395

Data are presented as numbers or median (range) values. HCV, hepatitis C virus; HBV, hepatitis B virus; AIH, autoimmune hepatitis; PBC, primary biliary cholangitis; NASH, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; TRPG, tricuspid regurgitant pressure gradient; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide.

TABLE 2 Comparison of baseline characteristics between patients with TRPG <35 mmHg and ≥35 mmHg

Factor	TRPG <35 mmHg n = 435	TRPG ≥35 mmHg n = 51	p value
Gender (Male/ Female)	245 / 190	20/ 31	0.025
Age (years)	72 (22–92)	71 (35-91)	0.115
Etiology (Alcohol/ HBV or HCV/ AIH or PBC/ NASH /others)	96/ 185/ 55/ 65/ 34	12/ 18/ 10/ 7/ 4	0.678
Total bilirubin (mg/dL)	0.8 (0.2–26.5)	1.1 (0.2–7.9)	0.428
Serum Albumin (g/dL)	3.7 (1.2–5.2)	3.6 (2.2–4.7)	0.360
Prothrombin time (%)	87.4 (18.0–167.9)	81.0 (26.0–113.4)	0.194
Child-Pugh score Child-Pugh class (A/ B/ C)	6 (5–13) 279/ 109/ 47	6 (5–12) 28/ 16/ 7	0.699 0.433
ALBI score ALBI grade (1/ 2a/ 2b/ 3)	-2.44 (-3.67–0.14) 175/ 77/ 122/ 61	-2.34 (-3.44– -0.83) 17/ 9/ 18/ 7	0.326 0.709
BNP (pg/mL)	35.8 (3.3–708.5)	63.5 (7.4–712.0)	1.15×10^-3
Shortness of breath (Presence/ Absence)	68/ 367	23/ 28	3.76×10^-6

TABLE 3 Factors significantly and independently associated with TRPG ≥35 mmHg

		Univariate			Multivariate
Factors	Category	OR	95%CI	P value	OR	95%CI	P value
Gender	Female	1.999	1.104–3.617	0.022	1.862	1.009–3.951	0.047
Shortness of breath	presence	4.433	2.411–8.153	1.66×10⁻⁶	4.067	2.191–7.549	8.81×10⁻⁶
BNP (pg/mL)	≥49 pg/mL	2.206	1.223–3.978	8.59×10⁻³	2.066	1.125–3.798	0.019

TRPG, tricuspid regurgitant pressure gradient; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide.

PoPHSuppleFigure1.tif
Supplementary Fig. 1 Distribution of TRPG values among the 486 patients, with 51 (10.5%) found to have TRPG ≥35 mmHg.
PoPHSuppleFigure2.tif
Supplementary Fig. 2 Distribution of serum BNP values.
PoPHSuppleFigure3.tif
Supplementary Fig. 3 Proportions of patients with TRPG ≥35 mmHg according to liver disease etiology.
PoPHSuppleTable1.docx

Download PDF

Reviewers agreed at journal
25 Aug, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
25 Aug, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
20 Aug, 2022
First submitted to journal
19 Aug, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Risk factors for portopulmonary hypertension in patients with cirrhosis: A prospective, multicenter study

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Patients And Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

Declarations

References

Tables

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1