Selamet Tierney Elif Seda, Levine Jami C, Sleeper Lynn A, Roman Mary J, Bradley Timothy J, Colan Steven D, Chen Shan, Campbell M Jay, Cohen Meryl S, De Backer Julie, Heydarian Haleh, Hoskoppal Arvind, Lai Wyman W, Liou Aimee, Marcus Edward, Nutting Arni, Olson Aaron K, Parra David A, Pearson Gail D, Pierpont Mary Ella, Printz Beth F, Pyeritz Reed E, Ravekes William, Sharkey Angela M, Srivastava Shubhika, Young Luciana, Lacro Ronald V
Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Am J Cardiol. 2018 May 1;121(9):1094-1101. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.01.016. Epub 2018 Feb 13.
The Pediatric Heart Network randomized trial of atenolol versus losartan in the Marfan syndrome showed no treatment differences in the rates of aortic-root growth or clinical outcomes. In this report we present treatment effects on aortic stiffness and determine whether baseline aortic stiffness predicts aortic-root growth and clinical outcomes. Echocardiograms at 0, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months from 608 subjects (6 months to 25 years) who met original Ghent criteria and had a maximum aortic-root z-score (ARz) >3 were centrally reviewed. Stiffness index (SI) and elastic modulus (EM) were calculated for aortic root and ascending aorta. Data were analyzed using multivariable mixed effects modeling and Cox regression. Heart rate-corrected aortic-root SI over 3 years decreased with atenolol but did not change with losartan (-0.298 ± 0.139 vs 0.141 ± 0.139/year, p = 0.01). In the entire cohort, above-median aortic-root SI (>9.1) and EM (>618 mm Hg) predicted a smaller annual decrease in ARz (p ≤0.001). Upper-quartile aortic-root EM (>914 mm Hg) predicted the composite outcome of aortic-root surgery, dissection, or death (hazard ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 4.63, p = 0.04). Crude 3-year event rates were 10.4% versus 3.2% for higher versus lower EM groups. In conclusion, atenolol was associated with a decrease in aortic-root SI, whereas losartan was not. Higher baseline aortic-root SI and EM were associated with a smaller decrease in ARz and increased risk for clinical outcomes. These data suggest that noninvasive aortic stiffness measures may identify patients at higher risk of progressive aortic enlargement and adverse clinical outcomes, potentially allowing for closer monitoring and more aggressive therapy.
小儿心脏网络针对马凡综合征开展的阿替洛尔与氯沙坦对比随机试验表明,在主动脉根部生长速率或临床结局方面,两种治疗方法并无差异。在本报告中,我们阐述了治疗对主动脉僵硬度的影响,并确定基线主动脉僵硬度是否可预测主动脉根部生长及临床结局。对608名符合最初根特标准且主动脉根部最大z评分(ARz)>3的受试者(6个月至25岁)在0、6、12、24和36个月时的超声心动图进行了集中审查。计算了主动脉根部和升主动脉的僵硬度指数(SI)和弹性模量(EM)。使用多变量混合效应模型和Cox回归对数据进行分析。3年间,阿替洛尔使心率校正后的主动脉根部SI降低,而氯沙坦则未使其改变(-0.298±0.139与0.141±0.139/年,p = 0.01)。在整个队列中,主动脉根部SI(>9.1)和EM(>618 mmHg)高于中位数可预测ARz的年降低幅度较小(p≤0.001)。主动脉根部EM上四分位数(>914 mmHg)可预测主动脉根部手术、夹层分离或死亡的复合结局(风险比2.17,95%置信区间1.02至4.63,p = 0.04)。EM较高组与较低组的3年粗事件发生率分别为10.4%和3.2%。总之,阿替洛尔可使主动脉根部SI降低,而氯沙坦则不然。较高的基线主动脉根部SI和EM与ARz降低幅度较小及临床结局风险增加相关。这些数据表明,无创主动脉僵硬度测量可能有助于识别主动脉进行性扩大和不良临床结局风险较高的患者,从而有可能进行更密切的监测和更积极的治疗。