학술논문
Which Functional Classification Scale is Optimal for Children with Pulmonary Hypertension (PAH)?
Original Article
Original Article
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Source
Pediatric Cardiology. December 2020, Vol. 41 Issue 8, p1725, 5 p.
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
0172-0643
Abstract
Author(s): Anna Migdal [sup.1], Malgorzata Zuk [sup.1], Dorota Jagiellowicz-Kowalska [sup.1], Zuzanna Powichrowska [sup.1], Grazyna Brzezinska-Rajszys [sup.1] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.413923.e, 0000 0001 2232 2498, Department of Cardiology, The Children's Memorial [...]
Functional status assessed by the WHO-FC scale derived from adults is a known prognostic factor for pulmonary hypertension. Data on the usefulness of the Panama-FC scale in assessing children with pulmonary hypertension are limited. The study was performed to compare functional status results (WHO-FC and Panama-FC) and to assess the usefulness of these scales in various clinical situations. The reliability of the Panama-FC questionnaire method for facilitating patient evaluation was also examined. 26 functional status assessments (7 in disease progression/after treatment intensification) in both scales were analyzed in 19 patients with PAH confirmed in RHC. WHO-FC, Panama-FC scales, and questionnaire-based on Panama-FC were conducted independently by three different physicians. Results of assessments were compared with each other and with 6MWD, NTproBNP level, and echo parameters (TAPSE, RV/LV ratio). The Panama-FC scale results obtained using the medical interview method and questionnaire did not differ. Both WHO-FC and Panama-FC classes well-reflected disease advancement confirmed by non-invasive parameters (NTproBNP, 6MWD, TAPSE, RV/LV ratio). Differences between grading the class in both scales were observed: 5pts were classified to II (Panama-FC) vs I (WHO-FC), 2pts were in lower risk group in WHO-FC (II) vs Panama (IIIa). Worsening or improvement after treatment intensification in functional status in both scales was connected with the significant change of NTproBNP level. The 6-min walking distance did not change. TAPSE, RV/LV ratio changed significantly in 3pts with IPAH, accordingly to change in WHO-FC and Panama-FC. WHO-FC and Panama-FC well reflect the disease advancement. The questionnaire method simplified the use of the Panama-FC scale. The Panama-FC scale appears to be better for assessing functional status during long-term follow-up, while the WHO-FC scale was more useful in short-term treatment monitoring.
Functional status assessed by the WHO-FC scale derived from adults is a known prognostic factor for pulmonary hypertension. Data on the usefulness of the Panama-FC scale in assessing children with pulmonary hypertension are limited. The study was performed to compare functional status results (WHO-FC and Panama-FC) and to assess the usefulness of these scales in various clinical situations. The reliability of the Panama-FC questionnaire method for facilitating patient evaluation was also examined. 26 functional status assessments (7 in disease progression/after treatment intensification) in both scales were analyzed in 19 patients with PAH confirmed in RHC. WHO-FC, Panama-FC scales, and questionnaire-based on Panama-FC were conducted independently by three different physicians. Results of assessments were compared with each other and with 6MWD, NTproBNP level, and echo parameters (TAPSE, RV/LV ratio). The Panama-FC scale results obtained using the medical interview method and questionnaire did not differ. Both WHO-FC and Panama-FC classes well-reflected disease advancement confirmed by non-invasive parameters (NTproBNP, 6MWD, TAPSE, RV/LV ratio). Differences between grading the class in both scales were observed: 5pts were classified to II (Panama-FC) vs I (WHO-FC), 2pts were in lower risk group in WHO-FC (II) vs Panama (IIIa). Worsening or improvement after treatment intensification in functional status in both scales was connected with the significant change of NTproBNP level. The 6-min walking distance did not change. TAPSE, RV/LV ratio changed significantly in 3pts with IPAH, accordingly to change in WHO-FC and Panama-FC. WHO-FC and Panama-FC well reflect the disease advancement. The questionnaire method simplified the use of the Panama-FC scale. The Panama-FC scale appears to be better for assessing functional status during long-term follow-up, while the WHO-FC scale was more useful in short-term treatment monitoring.