Comparison of Clinical Features between Idiopathic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension.
10.4046/trd.2005.59.2.170
- Author:
Hyun Kuk KIM
1
;
Joo Ock NA
;
Jong Joon AHN
;
Yong Bum PARK
;
Jae Min LIM
;
Sang Bum HONG
;
Yeon Mok OH
;
Tae Sun SHIM
;
Chae Man LIM
;
Younsuck KOH
;
Woo Sung KIM
;
Dong Soon KIM
;
Won Dong KIM
;
Sang Do LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. sdlee@amc.seoul.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension;
Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension;
Perfusion lung scan;
Differential diagnosis
- MeSH:
Age Distribution;
Cardiac Catheterization;
Cardiac Catheters;
Diagnosis, Differential;
Electrocardiography;
Female;
Humans;
Hypertension*;
Hypertension, Pulmonary*;
Lung;
Perfusion;
Pulmonary Embolism;
Radiography, Thoracic;
Respiratory Function Tests;
Sex Characteristics
- From:Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
2005;59(2):170-178
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) are rare but significantly imperative in inducing chronic pulmonary hypertension. Clinically, it is difficult to distinguish between IPAH and CTEPH. However, the treatment of pulmonary hypertension is different depending on the disease. The present study was performed to analyze the similarities and differences in clinical features between IPAH and CTEPH. METHODS: During a nine-year period, thirty-three patients with IPAH and twenty-two patients with CTEPH were enrolled. Symptoms, physical findings, chest radiograph, electrocardiograph, pulmonary function test, echocardiograph, perfusion lung scan, right heart catheterization results were analyzed between both the groups. RESULTS: The median age of IPAH group was 33 (6~70) years that was lower than that (52(27~80) years) of CTEPH group. Amongst the IPAH patients, there was female predominance (76 %) and there was no sex difference between the patients with CTEPH. Both the groups exhibited similarity in the results of chest radiograph, electrocardiograph, pulmonary function test, and echocardiograph. In the perfusion lung scan, all IPAH patients exhibited findings with normal (28%) or low probability (72%) of pulmonary embolism and all CTEPH patients exhibited findings with high probability of pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: Although IPAH and CTEPH bear similarities in terms of symptoms, physical signs and general investigation results, there were differences in age distribution, sex predominance and results of perfusion lung scan.
