ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Elderly Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Hypertension: Clinical Characteristics, Survival, and Risk Stratification in a Single-Center Prospective Registry.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hemodynamic and Thrombotic Vulnerability in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension at High Altitude: Multivariable Predictors of Mortality.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Global disease burden of pulmonary arterial hypertension: patterns and inequality in 1990-2021, with projections to 2035.BMC public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe predictive value of the risk stratification scales in elderly patients with IPAH might differ from that in younger patients. It is unknown whether young and older IPAH patients have the same survival dependence on PAH-specific therapy numbers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic relevance of risk stratification scales and PAH medication numbers in elderly IPAH patients in comparison with young IPAH patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 119 patients from a prospective single-center PAH registry were divided into group I < 60 years old (n = 89) and group II ≥ 60 years old (n = 30). ESC/ERS, REVEAL, and REVEAL 2.0 risk stratification scores were assessed at baseline, as well as H2FpEF score and survival at follow-up.
resultsDuring a mean follow-up period of 2.9 years (1.63; 6.0), 42 (35.3%) patients died; at 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10 years, survival was 95%, 88.6%, 78.5%, 61.7%, 48.5%, and 33.7%, respectively. No survival differences were observed between the two groups, despite the use of monotherapy in the elderly patients. The best predictive REVEAL value in elderly patients (IPAH patients ≥ 60 years) was AUC 0.73 (0.56-0.91),
conclusionRisk stratification in the elderly IPAH patients requires a fundamentally different approach than that of younger patients, taking into account the initial limitations in physical performance and comorbidities that interfere with current assessment scores. The REVEAL score reliably stratifies patients at any age and LHD comorbidities. The initial monotherapy seems to be reasonable in patients over 60 years. Selection tools for initial combination PAH therapy in older IPAH patients with comorbidities need to be validated in prospective observational studies.
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.