Efficacy of pulmonary artery pressure monitoring in patients with chronic heart failure: a meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials

Adjustment of treatment based on remote monitoring of pulmonary artery (PA) pressure may reduce the risk of hospital admission for heart failure (HF). We have conducted a meta-analysis of large randomized trials investigating this question.

A systematic literature search was performed for randomized clinical trials with PA pressure monitoring devices in patients with HF. The primary outcome of interest was the total number of HF hospitalizations. Other outcomes assessed were urgent visits leading to treatment with intravenous diuretics, all-cause mortality, and composites. Treatment effects are expressed as hazard ratios, and pooled effect estimates were obtained applying random effects meta-analyses. Three eligible randomized clinical trials were identified that included 1898 outpatients in New York Heart Association functional classes II–IV, either hospitalized for HF in the prior 12 months or with elevated plasma NT-proBNP concentrations. The mean follow-up was 14.7 months, 67.8% of the patients were men, and 65.8% had an ejection fraction ≤40%. Compared to patients in the control group, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for total HF hospitalizations in those randomized to PA pressure monitoring was 0.70 (0.58–0.86) (P = .0005). The corresponding hazard ratio for the composite of total HF hospitalizations, urgent visits and all-cause mortality was 0.75 (0.61–0.91; P = .0037) and for all-cause mortality 0.92 (0.73–1.16). Subgroup analyses, including ejection fraction phenotype, revealed no evidence of heterogeneity in the treatment effect.

The use of remote PA pressure monitoring to guide treatment of patients with HF reduces episodes of worsening HF and subsequent hospitalizations.