These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Transition from intravenous epoprostenol to intravenous treprostinil in pulmonary hypertension.
    Author: Gomberg-Maitland M, Tapson VF, Benza RL, McLaughlin VV, Krichman A, Widlitz AC, Barst RJ.
    Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2005 Dec 15; 172(12):1586-9. PubMed ID: 16151039.
    Abstract:
    RATIONALE: Intravenous epoprostenol improves exercise capacity and survival in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. The prostacyclin analog treprostinil is also efficacious by subcutaneous infusion, is easier to administer, and has a longer half-life. With the demonstration of bioequivalence between subcutaneous and intravenous treprostinil, intravenous treprostinil may have an overall better risk-benefit profile than intravenous epoprostenol. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of transitioning patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension from intravenous epoprostenol to intravenous treprostinil. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a 12-wk prospective open label study were switched from intravenous epoprostenol to intravenous treprostinil over 24 to 48 h. The intravenous treprostinil dose was adjusted to minimize symptoms/side effects. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients (mean age, 43 yr; 22 women) were enrolled. Twenty-seven patients completed the protocol; 4 patients transitioned back to epoprostenol. Six-minute walk distance (n = 27; baseline, 438 +/- 16 m; Week 12, 439 +/- 16 m), Naughton-Balke treadmill test time (n = 26; baseline, 582 +/- 50 s; Week 12, 622 +/- 48 s), functional class, and Borg score were maintained with intravenous treprostinil at Week 12 versus intravenous epoprostenol before transition. At Week 12, mean pulmonary artery pressure increased 4 +/- 1 mm Hg (n = 27, p < 0.01), cardiac index decreased 0.4 +/- 0.1 L/min/m2 (n = 27, p = 0.01), and pulmonary vascular resistance increased 3 +/- 1 Wood units x m2 (n = 26, p < 0.01). No serious adverse events were attributed to treprostinil. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that transition from intravenous epoprostenol to intravenous treprostinil is safe and effective; whether the hemodynamic differences associated with intravenous treprostinil are clinically important requires longer follow-up.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]