Research Information System
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, vol.42, no.8, pp.1590-1597, 2024 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
Objective This study compares the performance of three composite pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) screening tools in a real-life SSc cohort, according to both the previous 2015 ESC/ERS guideline and the recent 2022 ESC/ERS guideline haemodynamic criteria. Methods Consecutive SSc patients without a previous diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension (PH) were screened for PAH using the European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society (ESC/ERS), DETECT, and Australian Scleroderma Interest Group (ASIG) algorithms. Right heart catheterisation (RHC) referral performances for PAH were compared according to the 2022 ESC/ERS PAH criteria. Results Thirty-five of the 81 patients required RHC; 15 (18.5%) according to ESC/ERS, 27 (33.3%) according to DETECT, and 25 (31%) according to ASIG. The final diagnoses were no-PH in 17 patients, WHO group 1 PH (PAH) in 8 patients, WHO group 2 PH in 8 patients, and WHO group 3 PH in 2 patients. When the haemodynamic criteria of the previous ESC/ERS guideline were applied, only one patient was diagnosed with PAH. The sensitivities of the algorithms for the diagnosis of PAH were 62.5% for ESC/ERS, 75% for DETECT, 87.5% for ASIG according to the 2022 ESC/ERS guideline definition, and 100% for all according to the previous ESC/ERS guideline. Conclusion With the recent criteria, PAH diagnosis in patients with SSc increased by 1.8-fold. Current algorithms for screening PAH are less sensitive with these revised criteria. Although the ASIG algorithm seems more sensitive, it can still miss the diagnosis. The multimodal/algorithmic approach seems to be the best option for predicting PAH.