ArticleESC heart failure2025
Comparison of supine and sitting pulmonary pressures in ambulatory heart failure patients using the novel Cordella pulmonary pressure system.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim of this study is to examine the relationship between supine and seated pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) measurements using the CordellaTM HF management system (Cordella) in patients with heart failure (HF). METHOD AND
resultsPaired supine and seated PAP readings from the SIRONA 2 and PROACTIVE-HF trials were included. A total of 504 NYHA class III HF patients contributed 40 115 paired measurements. Mean supine mean PAP (mPAP) was 29.1 ± 11.6 mmHg compared with a mean seated mPAP of 22.1 ± 12.2 mmHg (supine-seated difference 7.1 ± 6.5 mmHg, correlation = 0.85; P < 0.001); mean supine sPAP was 44.4 ± 16.6 mmHg compared to a mean seated sPAP 35.4 ± 17.8 mmHg (supine-seated difference 9.0 ± 8.5 mmHg, correlation = 0.88; P < 0.001); and mean supine dPAP was 19.1 ± 9.5 mmHg compared to a mean seated dPAP of 13.9 ± 9.5 mmHg (supine-seated difference 5.2 ± 5.6 mmHg, correlation = 0.82; P < 0.001). Quartile analysis demonstrated that supine-seated differences were larger at lower mPAP levels and narrowed at higher pressures (P < 0.001). Seated mPAP trends showed modest increases prior to heart failure hospitalization.
conclusionsThis study presents the largest paired comparison of supine and sitting PAP and demonstrates a high degree of correlation between seated and supine measures of PAP. Supine-seated differences may reflect venous capacitance and preload reserve, providing novel physiologic insights into HF phenotyping. Seated PAP measurements are a valid and reliable alternative to supine measurements for HF patients with PAP sensors. Given patient preference for seated measurements and their closer reflection of daily physiologic status, incorporating seated PAP into routine monitoring may enhance adherence and optimize remote HF management.
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.