Abstract
Background Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a devastating potential complication of pulmonary embolism (PE), a manifestation of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The incidence of and risk factors for PH in those with prior VTE is poorly characterized.
Methods ICD codes from inpatient and outpatient medical claims from MarketScan administrative databases for years 2011-2018 were used were used to identify cases of VTE, comorbidities prior to the VTE event, and PH occurring subsequent to the VTE event. Cumulative incidence and hazard ratios (HR), and their 95% confidence intervals (CI), were calculated.
Results The 170,021 VTE cases included in the analysis were on average (± SD) 57.5 ± 15.8 years old and 50.5% were female. A total of 5,946 PH cases accrued over an average follow-up of 1.94 years. Two years after incident VTE the cumulative incidence (95% CI) of PH was 3.5% (3.4%, 3.7%) overall. It was higher among women [3.9% (3.8%-4.1%)] than men [3.2% (3.0%-3.3%)], and among patients presenting with PE [6.2% (6.0%-6.5%)] than those presenting with deep vein thrombosis-only [1.1% (1.0%-1.2%)]. Adjusting for age and sex, risk of PH was higher among VTE patients with underlying comorbidities. The strongest associations were observed with concomitant heart failure [HR: 2.17 (1.04-2.31)], chronic pulmonary disease [2.01 (1.90-2.14)], and myocardial infarction [1.53 (1.40-1.67)].
Conclusions In this large real-world population of insured people with VTE, 3.5% developed PH in the 2 years following their initial VTE event. Risk was higher among women, with increasing age, and in those with additional comorbidities at the time of the VTE event. These data provide insights into the burden of PH and risk factors for PH among VTE patients.
Competing Interest Statement
KWP served as a consultant for Actelion and receives grant funding from United Therapeutics. TT has served on an advisory board for Actelion and Gilead. All other authors report no competing interst.
Clinical Trial
N/A: This was secondary analysis of an existing administrative database
Funding Statement
Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Heart, Lung, And Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01-HL131579, as well as K24HL148521 (AA) and NIH K08 HL140100 (KWP). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The University of Minnesota Institutional Review Board deemed this research exempt from review since it utilized administrative databases that were pre-existing, de-identified and HIPAA compliant.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos