Evidence Hub

Successful transition from intravenous epoprostenol to oral selexipag and inhaled iloprost in a case of severe pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with systemic lupus erythematosus

Saiki C, Kashiwado Y, Yokoyama T, Ayano M, Imabayashi K, Kawano S, Higashioka K, Kimoto Y et al.

Modern rheumatology case reports, 2022

Abstract

A 25-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital with severe pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE-PAH). Her mean pulmonary arterial pressure was 56 mmHg, and her SLE Disease Activity Index-2 K score was 14 on admission. In addition to a strong immunosuppressive regimen, which included steroid pulse therapy followed by high-dose oral prednisolone (1 mg/kg) and intravenous cyclophosphamide, an upfront combination of vasodilator therapy, including oral tadalafil, macitentan, and intravenous epoprostenol, was administered in the early phase. Two months later, her mean pulmonary arterial pressure was 29 mmHg, and her other haemodynamic markers showed significant improvement. She refused to start life-long intravenous epoprostenol therapy and so was switched to oral selexipag and inhaled iloprost. The transition was successful, and she has experienced no exacerbations of SLE-PAH during the 10 months since the onset of pulmonary arterial hypertension. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of intravenous epoprostenol being switched to alternative oral and inhaled therapy in a patient with SLE-PAH. In combination with adequate immunosuppressive therapy, it is probably easier to make this transition in patients with SLE-PAH than in those with pulmonary arterial hypertension of a different aetiology. Continuous infusion of epoprostenol can have potentially life-threatening complications and a detrimental effect on the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

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