Table 3

Linear mixed model analysis of differences in risk parameters before and after treatment escalation

VariablePAHCTEPH
Follow-up risk parametersEstimateCIP valueEstimateCIP value
Heart rate variability, ms24.9622.9 to 26.94<0.0001*12.479.78 to 15.16<0.0001*
Physical activity, minutes20.515.1 to 25.88<0.0001*26.119.16 to 33.10<0.0001*
Physical activity indexed by daytime heart date0.220.16 to 0.28<0.0001*0.320.25 to 0.40<0.0001*
HR at night, bpm−5.5−6.11 to −4.87<0.0001*−4.11−4.83 to −3.40<0.0001*
NT-proBNP, doubling−0.32−0.69 to 0.0390.083−2.62−3.51 to −1.640.0001*
6MWD, metres37.955.22 to 71.100.024*151.5047.27 to 222.150.0002*
WHO FC−0.45−0.89 to 0.030.047*−0.84−1.5 to 0.220.0048
COMPERA score−0.58−1.16 to −0.0470.041*−1.00−1.71 to −0.41<0.0001*
  • Comparisons of differences in risk parameters before and after treatment escalation in the 15 patients who underwent a treatment change during the study grouped as patients with PAH (n=10) and patients with CTEPH (n=5). The comparisons are made in the ILR and European Society of Cardiology and European Respiratory Society (ESC/ERS) (ESC/ESR) risk assessment parameters using a linear mixed model. Estimates of the linear regression models. All associations were adjusted for age.

  • CTEPH, chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension; HR, heart rate; ILR, implantable loop recorder; 6MWD, 6-min walking distance; PAH, pulmonary arterial hypertension; WHO FC, WHO functional classification.