Phenotyping exercise limitation of patients with Interstitial Fibrosing Lung Disease: the importance of exercise hemodynamics.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Left-heart dysfunction and pulmonary vasculopathy are increasingly recognized as contributing factors of exercise capacity limitation in interstitial fibrosing lung disease (IFLD). Moreover, the clinical significance of exercise pulmonary hypertension (ePH) in pulmonary and cardiac diseases has been documented, representing a risk factor for decreased exercise capacity and survival, progression to resting pulmonary hypertension (PH) and overall clinical worsening. We conducted a prospective study aiming at: (a) assessing the prevalence of PH and ePH in a cohort of 40 functionally limited patients with IFLD, (b) determining the post-capillary (postC) or pre-capillary (preC) etiology of either PH or ePH in this cohort, and (c) examining the correlations between invasively and non-invasively measured exercise variables among hemodynamic groups.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

40 IFLD patients underwent cardiopulmonary evaluation, including: clinical examination, lung function tests, 6-minute walking test, heart ultrasonography, cardiopulmonary exercise test and, finally, right heart catheterization (RHC). Resting hemodynamic evaluation was followed by the exercise protocol proposed by Herve et al, using a bedside cycle ergometer in the supine position. Abnormal elevation of mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) above 30mmHg during exercise, with respect to abnormal elevation of cardiac output (CO) below 10 L/min (mPAP-CO ratio ⩾3 mmHg·min·L) was used to define ePH (Herve et al, 2015). Secondary hemodynamic evaluation involved detection of abnormal pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (PAWP) increase at peak exercise in relation to CO. Specifically, ΔPAWP/ΔCO >2 mmHg/L per minute determined an abnormal PAWP elevation (Bentley et al, 2020).

RESULTS

Among the 40-patient cohort, 25% presented postC PH, 37.5% preC PH, 27.5% ePH, with the remaining 10% recording normal hemodynamics. PAWP evaluation during exercise revealed a postC etiology in 4 out of the 11 patients presenting ePH, and a postC etiology in 6 out of the 15 patients presenting resting preC PH. Mean values of non-invasive variables did not display statistically significant differences among hemodynamic groups, except for: diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), carbon monoxide transfer coefficient (KCO) and the ratio of functional vital capacity to DLCO (FVC%/DLCO%), which were lower in both ePH and PH groups (p < 0.05). Resting values of CO, cardiac index (CI), stroke volume (SV) and pulmonary vascular compliance (PVC) were significantly impaired in ePH, preC-PH and postC-PH groups when compared to the normal group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both PH and ePH were highly prevalent within the IFLD patient group, suggesting that RHC should be offered more frequently in functionally limited patients. Diffusion capacity markers must thus guide decision making, in parallel to clinical evaluation. ePH was associated to lower resting CO and PVC, in a similar way to resting PH, indicating the relevance of cardiopulmonary function to exercise limitation. Finally, the use of the ΔPAWP/ΔCO>2 criterion further uncovered PH of postcapillary etiology, highlighting the complexity of hemodynamics in IFLD.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov ID: NCT03706820.