ArticleAnatolian journal of cardiology2021
How did the updated hemodynamic definitions affect the frequency of pulmonary hypertension in patients with systemic sclerosis?
Article in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePulmonary hypertension (PH) is a one of the major causes of death in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). In this study, we investigated the impact of updated hemodynamic definition proposed by the 6th PH World Symposium (6th WSPH) on the frequency of PH and its subtypes in patients with SSc.
methodsPatients with SSc admitted between 2015 and 2019 and who underwent right heart catheterization (RHC) were included. The frequency of PH and its subgroups based on the hemodynamic definitions of both 2015 European Society of Cardiology/European respiratory Society (ESC/ERS) PH guidelines and 6th WSPH was compared.
resultsOf the 65 patients with SSc, 23 (35.4%) had normal mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP), 20 (30.8%) had mildly elevated mPAP (21-24 mm Hg), and 22 (33.8%) had PH [pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) (n=16, 24.6%), group 2 PH (n=5, 7.7%), group 3 PH (n=1, 1.5%)] according to the 2015 ESC/ERS PH definition. Based on the updated criteria, 7 (10.8% of total cohort) additional patients were reclassified as having PH [PAH (n=3), group 2 PH (n=3), group 3 PH (n=1)].
conclusionThe impact of the updated definition on the frequency of PH and PAH in our cohort was greater than previously reported, which may be caused by the difference in screening strategies for PAH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.