ReviewPulmonary circulation
Evolution of randomized, controlled studies of medical therapy in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension.
Review in Pulmonary circulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Placebo Effect in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Prostacyclin pathway vasodilators in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH): A systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Pulmonary circulation · 2024Article
- Programmed Follow-up and Quality Control of Treatment Techniques Enhance Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Management: Lessons From a Multidisciplinary Team.Korean circulation journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), many patients have inoperable disease, and some have persistent or recurrent pulmonary hypertension (PH) after surgery. Alternative options (balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) and PH-targeted medical therapy) are, therefore, required. Studies of medical therapies for CTEPH have evolved since Aerosolized Iloprost Randomized (AIR), the first randomized, controlled study of a PH-targeted therapy (inhaled iloprost) to include patients with CTEPH. Key learnings from these studies include the need to evaluate CTEPH separately from other types of PH, the importance of prospective operability adjudication as part of the protocol, and the need for sufficient duration to allow treatment benefits to become apparent. The 16-week Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Soluble Guanylate Cyclase-Stimulator Study 1 (CHEST-1) study was the first to operationalize these learnings, demonstrating a significant mean improvement in 6-minute walk distance (+46 m) and improvements in hemodynamic endpoints with riociguat versus placebo. Findings from previous studies will inform the design of future studies to address key issues related to combination medical therapy. Data on combinations of macitentan with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors or oral prostanoids are available from MERIT, the first study to allow such regimens. No data on combinations including riociguat, the only licensed medical therapy for CTEPH, are available. Studies are also needed for multimodality treatment, including medical therapy plus BPA, and medical therapy as a bridge to PEA in selected operable patients. To address these issues and improve patient outcomes, it is vital that we learn from current studies to improve future trial design.
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.