ArticlePulmonary circulation2026
Performance of Guideline-Recommended Approaches to Echocardiographic Investigation for Pulmonary Hypertension: Analysis of the CIPHER Study.
Article in Pulmonary circulation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04193046 (A Prospective, Multicenter Study for the Identification of Biomarker Signatures for the Early Detection of Pulmonary Hypertension), which is not on this 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.
A Prospective, Multicenter Study for the Identification of Biomarker Signatures for the Early Detection of Pulmonary Hypertension (PH)
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance of Guideline-Recommended Approaches to Echocardiographic Investigation for Pulmonary Hypertension: Analysis of the CIPHER Study.Pulmonary circulation · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Guidelines recommend different approaches to investigate for pulmonary hypertension (PH) by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). We used data from the CIPHER study (NCT04193046) to prospectively evaluate TTE detection of PH. Participants newly referred to PH clinics who underwent right heart catheterization (RHC) within 6 weeks and TTE within 60 days of enrolment (blinded central TTE reading) were classified by TTE probability of PH applying (i) the 2015 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) TTE algorithm or (ii) right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) > 40 mmHg. For calculation of sensitivity and specificity, 'non-assessable' patients (peak tricuspid regurgitation velocity [TRV] missing or ≤ 2.8 m/s with missing data on other echocardiographic signs) and patients with missing RVSP were counted as PH-negative. Performance was measured against RHC-confirmed diagnosis of mean pulmonary artery pressure > 20 mmHg. Of 475 patients included, 345 (73%) had PH. Using the ESC/ERS algorithm, PH probability was high, intermediate, low and non-assessable for 198, 104, 22 and 151 patients and PH prevalence was 98%, 75%, 23%, and 44%, respectively. Seventy-three patients were missing RVSP and 292 had RVSP > 40 mmHg. The two TTE approaches achieved similar results: sensitivity was 79%-77%, specificity was 78%-79%. This prospective study of patients newly referred to PH centres for RHC found similar sensitivity and specificity when using either RVSP > 40 mmHg or the 2015 ESC/ERS TTE algorithm. Among patients who were low-probability or non-assessable by ESC/ERS algorithm, 42% had PH, highlighting the persistent need for additional non-invasive investigative tools.
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.