Observational studyThe European respiratory journal2025
Survival trends in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: an observational study.
Observational study in The European respiratory journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Temporal Trends in Age Profile and Safety of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty for CTEPH.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- Right-sided cardiogenic shock from acute pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy: a rare but deadly cardio-oncologic and metabolic emergency.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Review
- Development and validation of a prediction model for venous thromboembolic events following hematoma evacuation in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment options for patients with chronic thromboembolic hypertension (CTEPH) have increased over the past decade. However, it is unknown whether the outcomes of patients with CTEPH have changed as well.
methodsThis retrospective study analysed the data of 834 patients with CTEPH, categorised into early (April 1980-December 1999), middle (January 2000-September 2010) and current (October 2010-December 2023) eras. The primary end-point was all-cause mortality. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess changes in all-cause mortality after adjusting for confounding variables.
results95, 210 and 529 patients were from the early, middle and current eras, respectively. The proportion of patients who did not receive CTEPH therapy decreased from 65% in the early era to 36% and 3% in the middle and current eras, respectively. Meanwhile, the adoption of multimodal treatment increased from 0% to 58% over time. The Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed significant improvements in overall survival (log-rank p<0.001). The 5-year survival rates improved from 68% in the early era to 85% and 93% in the middle and current eras, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratios for mortality were 0.291 (95% CI 0.154-0.550; p<0.001) for the early
conclusionThe long-term prognosis of patients with CTEPH has significantly improved in recent decades.
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.