ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Diagnosing post-capillary hypertension in patients with left heart disease: impact of new guidelines.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of the New Definition on the Prognosis of Patients With Pulmonary Hypertension Compared to the Classic Definition.Korean circulation journal · 2025Article
- Definition, classification and diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension.The European respiratory journal · 2024Article
- Improved Interpretation of Pulmonary Artery Wedge Pressures through Left Atrial Volumetry-A Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- Impact of the 2022 pulmonary hypertension definition on haemodynamic classification and mortality in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing valve replacement.European heart journal open · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2022, the definition of pulmonary hypertension (PH) in the presence of left heart disease was updated according to the new joint guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS). The impact of the new ESC/ERS definition on the prevalence of post-capillary PH (pc-PH) and its subgroups of isolated post-capillary (Ipc-PH) and combined pre- and post-capillary PH (Cpc-PH) in patients with left heart disease is unclear.
methodsWe retrospectively identified N = 242 patients with left heart disease with available data on right heart catheterisation (RHC) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). The proportion of pc-PH and its subgroups was calculated according to the old and new ESC/ERS PH definition. As the old definition did not allow the exact allocation of all patients with pc-PH into a respective subgroup, unclassifiable patients (Upc-PH) were regarded separately.
resultsSeventy-six out of 242 patients had pc-PH according to the new ESC/ERS definitions, with 72 of these patients also meeting the criteria of the old definition. Using the old definition, 50 patients were diagnosed with Ipc-PH, 4 with Cpc-PH, and 18 with Upc-PH. Applying the new definition, Ipc-PH was diagnosed in 35 patients (4 newly), and Cpc-PH in 41 patients. No CMR parameter allowed differentiating between Ipc-PH and Cpc-PH, regardless of which guideline version was used.
conclusionApplying the new ESC/ERS 2022 guideline definitions mildly increased the proportion of patients diagnosed with pc-PH (+ 5.5%) but markedly increased Cpc-PH diagnoses. This effect was driven by the allocation of patients with formerly unclassifiable forms of post-capillary PH to the Cpc-PH subgroup and a significant shift of patients from the Ipc-PH to the Cpc-PH subgroup.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.