4.7 Review

Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 62, Issue 25, Pages D92-D99

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.024

Keywords

chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension; pulmonary endarterectomy; ventilation/perfusion scan; pulmonary angiogram

Funding

  1. Actelion
  2. Bayer
  3. GlaxoSmithKline
  4. Novartis
  5. Pfizer
  6. United Therapeutics
  7. Actelion Pharmaceuticals
  8. Gilead
  9. AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals
  10. Bayer AG
  11. Roche Diagnostics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Since the last World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension in 2008, we have witnessed numerous and exciting developments in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). Emerging clinical data and advances in technology have led to reinforcing and updated guidance on diagnostic approaches to pulmonary hypertension, guidelines that we hope will lead to better recognition and more timely diagnosis of CTEPH. We have new data on treatment practices across international boundaries as well as long-term outcomes for CTEPH patients treated with or without pulmonary endarterectomy. Furthermore, we have expanded data on alternative treatment options for select CTEPH patients, including data from multiple clinical trials of medical therapy, including 1 recent pivotal trial, and compelling case series of percutaneous pulmonary angioplasty. Lastly, we have garnered more experience, and on a larger international scale, with pulmonary endarterectomy, which is the treatment of choice for operable CTEPH. This report overviews and highlights these important interval developments as deliberated among our task force of CTEPH experts and presented at the 2013 World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension in Nice, France. (C) 2013 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available