Effectiveness of remote pulmonary artery pressure estimating in heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis

Szymon Urban,Oskar Szymański,Magdalena Grzesiak,Wojciech Tokarczyk,Mikołaj Błaziak,Maksym Jura,Michał Fułek,Katarzyna Fułek,Gracjan Iwanek,Piotr Gajewski,Piotr Ponikowski,Jan Biegus,Robert Zymliński

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-63742-0

IF: 4.6

2024-06-07

Scientific Reports

Abstract:Heart failure (HF) poses a significant challenge, often leading to frequent hospitalizations and compromised quality of life. Continuous pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) monitoring offers a surrogate for congestion status in ambulatory HF care. This meta-analysis examines the efficacy of PAP monitoring devices (CardioMEMS and Chronicle) in preventing adverse outcomes in HF patients, addressing gaps in prior randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Five RCTs (2572 participants) were systematically reviewed. PAP monitoring significantly reduced HF-related hospitalizations (RR 0.72 [95% CI 0.6–0.87], p = 0.0006) and HF events (RR 0.86 [95% CI 0.75–0.99], p = 0.03), with no impact on all-cause or cardiovascular mortality. Subgroup analyses highlighted the significance of CardioMEMS and blinded studies. Meta-regression indicated a correlation between prolonged follow-up and increased reduction in HF hospitalizations. The risk of bias was generally high, with evidence certainty ranging from low to moderate. PAP monitoring devices exhibit promise in diminishing HF hospitalizations and events, especially in CardioMEMS and blinded studies. However, their influence on mortality remains inconclusive. Further research, considering diverse patient populations and intervention strategies with extended follow-up, is crucial for elucidating the optimal role of PAP monitoring in HF management.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to evaluate the effectiveness of remote pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) monitoring in patients with heart failure (HF), especially the effect of using two devices, CardioMEMS and Chronicle, to prevent adverse outcomes. Specifically, through systematic review and meta - analysis methods, the paper aims to answer the following key questions:

1. **Can PAP monitoring reduce the number of HF - related hospitalizations?**
2. **Can PAP monitoring reduce the incidence of HF events (including hospitalization and emergency visits)?**
3. **Does PAP monitoring have an impact on all - cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality?**

### Research Background
Heart failure (HF) is a major health challenge, often leading to frequent hospitalizations and a decline in quality of life. Continuous pulmonary artery pressure monitoring is used as a surrogate marker for assessing the congestion status in HF patients. Although some previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored the effectiveness of PAP monitoring devices, the results are inconsistent and there are some limitations in study design. Therefore, this meta - analysis aims to synthesize the existing RCT data to further clarify the role of PAP monitoring in HF management.

### Main Findings
1. **Number of HF - related hospitalizations**: PAP monitoring significantly reduced the number of HF - related hospitalizations (risk ratio RR 0.72 [95% confidence interval 0.6 - 0.87], p = 0.0006).
2. **HF events**: PAP monitoring significantly reduced the incidence of HF events (including hospitalization and emergency visits) (RR 0.86 [95% confidence interval 0.75 - 0.99], p = 0.03).
3. **All - cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality**: PAP monitoring had no significant impact on all - cause mortality (odds ratio OR 0.91 [95% confidence interval 0.72 - 1.16], p = 0.46) and cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.68 - 1.25], p = 0.61).

### Subgroup Analysis and Sensitivity Analysis
- **CardioMEMS vs. Chronicle**: In studies using the CardioMEMS device, the effect of PAP monitoring was more significant (RR 0.66 [95% confidence interval 0.52 - 0.85], p = 0.001), while in studies using the Chronicle device, the effect was not significant (RR 0.84 [95% confidence interval 0.68 - 1.04], p = 0.1).
- **Blinded studies**: In studies with a blinded design, the effect of PAP monitoring was also more significant (RR 0.77 [95% confidence interval 0.66 - 0.90], p = 0.001).
- **Sensitivity analysis**: After excluding the largest study (GUIDE - HF), the effect of PAP monitoring in reducing the number of HF hospitalizations remained significant (RR 0.69 [95% confidence interval 0.56 - 0.86], p = 0.0008).

### Discussion
- **Relationship between monitoring and treatment**: PAP monitoring itself does not directly improve prognosis. The key lies in the treatment measures taken by doctors based on the monitoring results. For example, increasing the dose of diuretics can relieve congestion symptoms, but it does not necessarily improve prognosis.
- **Characteristics of patient groups**: PAP monitoring is more effective in the most vulnerable patient groups (such as elderly patients and patients with NYHA class III symptoms), which is in line with intuition.
- **Future research directions**: Further research is needed to determine the patient groups most suitable for PAP monitoring and to explore more effective treatment algorithms, such as optimizing guideline - directed medical therapy (GDMT), including RAAS blockers and SGLT - 2 inhibitors.

In conclusion, this meta - analysis provides strong evidence to support the effectiveness of PAP monitoring in reducing the number of HF - related hospitalizations and the incidence of HF events, especially in studies using the CardioMEMS device and in blinded - design studies. However, the impact of PAP monitoring on mortality remains unclear and more research is needed for further verification.