Why the study?
RV function determines morbidity and mortality in PAH, but progress in understanding RV failure has not yet yielded RV-selective therapies.
This review highlights that while afterload reduction is the current standard for PAH, novel therapies directly targeting right ventricular failure mechanisms are under investigation.
Afterload reduction should remain standard in PAH; leaves open whether direct RV-targeted therapies will improve outcomes.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Right ventricular (RV) function is an important determinant of morbidity and mortality in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Although substantial progress has been made in understanding the development of RV failure in the last decennia, this has not yet resulted in the development of RV selective therapies. In this review, we will discuss the current status on the treatment of RV failure and potential novel therapeutic strategies that are currently being investigated in clinical trials. RECENT FINDINGS: Increased afterload results in elevated wall tension. Consequences of increased wall tension include autonomic disbalance, metabolic shift and inflammation, negatively affecting RV contractility. Compromised RV systolic function and low cardiac output activate renin-angiotensin aldosterone system, which leads to fluid retention and further increase in RV wall tension. This vicious circle can be interrupted by directly targeting the determinants of RV wall tension; preload and afterload by PAH-medications and diuretics, but is also possibly by restoring neurohormonal and metabolic disbalance, and inhibiting maladaptive inflammation. A variety of RV selective drugs are currently being studied in clinical trials. SUMMARY: Nowadays, afterload reduction is still the cornerstone in treatment of PAH. New treatments targeting important pathobiological determinants of RV failure directly are emerging.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Groeneveldt et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: