Table 2.

Summary of studies evaluating eHealth as part of the medical management in PAH

Author/country	Type of study/level of evidence (CEBM)/type (and year) of publication	Study population	Intervention	Results	Significance level
Benza et al USA21–26	Case-series studies/level 4/CP (2012, 2015 and 2016) Retrospective cohort study/level 2b/JP (2015)	11 patients with advanced PAH, 6 of them with a recent hospitalisation for RHF CHAMPION study population	Haemodynamically guided management of patients through Cardiomems	CardioMEMS monitoring was safe at rest and during a 6MWT in PAH, and reduced hospitalisation rates in HF patients with PH CardioMEMS associated to a greater PAP reduction through medication changes in the ambulatory setting. Among patients with PH, there was a reduction in the composite endpoint of death and HF hospitalisation with ongoing knowledge of haemodynamics, but no difference in survival	1. 36% reduction in HF-related hospitalisation rates (0.60 vs 0.94, HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.81, p=0.0002) 2. Composite endpoint: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99, p=0.04 Survival: HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.22, p=0.28
Raina et al USA30	Retrospective cohort study/level 2b/CP (2014)	314 WHO Group 2 patients with PH from the CHAMPION study	Retrospective analysis of Cardiomems patients	Cardiomems associated with hospitalisation reductions in Group 2 patients with PAH	HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.81

CEBM: Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Oxford University(https://www.cebm.net/2009/06/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/)). CHAMPION study population: 550 patients with heart failure with Cardiomems; 314 of them with WHO Group 2 PAH.

CEBM, Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine; CP, conference paper; JP, journal paper; PAH, pulmonary arterial hypertension; PAP, pulmonary arterial pressure; PH, pulmonary hypertension; RHF, right heart failure.