Evidence Hub

Pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with connective tissue disease: meta-analysis of clinical trials

Masataka Kuwana, Hiroshi Watanabe, Nobushige Matsuoka, Naonobu Sugiyama

BMJ Open, 2013

3,073 participants · 20 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Few studies have focused on pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) associated with connective tissue diseases (CTDs). The optimal treatment for CTD-PAH has yet to be established. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of the data from evaluations of treatment for PAH generally (19 studies) and CTD-PAH specifically (nine studies) to compare the effects of pulmonary vasodilative PAH agents. MEDLINE, EMBASE and BIOSIS were searched. English-language full-text articles published between January 1990 and August 2012 were eligible. SETTING: International. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with PAH generally (n=3073) and CTD-PAH specifically (n=678). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Exercise capacity (6 min walk distance, 6 MWD). RESULTS: Patients with PAH (all forms) had mean age 32-55 years (women, 61-87%); CTD-PAH patients had mean age 45-55 years (women, 74-95%). Overall estimate of mean change in 6 MWD from baseline (95% CI) for the active treatment group versus the control group in all patients with PAH was 34.6 m (27.4-41.9 m). Pooled mean differences from the results for patients receiving placebo by subgroup of patients receiving phosphodiesterase (PDE)-5 inhibitors, endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) and prostacyclin (PGI2) analogues were 22.4-45.5, 39.5-44.2 and 12.4-64.9 m, respectively. Overall estimate of mean difference between changes in 6 MWD in patients with CTD-PAH was 34.2 m (23.3-45.0 m). Pooled mean differences by subgroup of patients receiving PDE-5 inhibitors, ERAs and PGI2…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,073 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free