Key result
Mild pulmonary hypertension linked to ~74% higher risk of major cardiopulmonary events vs. normal pressures.
Why the study?
The characteristics and clinical outcomes of pulmonary hypertension patients with mean pulmonary arterial pressure 21-24 mmHg have not been well described following recent guideline changes.
Does mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24 mmHg) increase the risk of adverse clinical outcomes compared to no pulmonary hypertension?
Cohort (n=1,080)
No
Does mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24 mmHg) increase the risk of adverse clinical outcomes compared to no pulmonary hypertension?
Hazard Ratio: 1.74 (95% CI 1.15–2.61)
Absolute Event Rate: 21.9% vs 14.4%
p-value: p=<0.05
Mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24 mmHg) is associated with an intermediate prognosis compared to no PH and conventional PH, with outcomes primarily driven by comorbidities rather than hemodynamics.
May warrant closer monitoring in right heart catheterization patients; leaves open whether revised thresholds should guide intervention trials.
Background: The definition of pulmonary hypertension (PH) was revised as mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) >20 mmHg from ≥25 mmHg in the recent PH guidelines; however, the characteristics of PH patients with mPAP 21-24 mmHg have not been well described. Methods: A total of 1080 individuals who underwent right heart catheterization (2018-2022) was categorized into 3 groups by mPAP: no PH with mPAP ≤20 mmHg, mild PH with mPAP 21-24 mmHg, and conventional PH with mPAP ≥25 mmHg. We assessed PH subtypes of hemodynamic and clinical classification and compared survival outcomes (all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, lung transplant) using Cox models. Results: Of them, 391 patients (36.2%) were diagnosed as PH including mild PH (n = 137) and conventional PH (n = 254). Phenotypically, mild PH was predominantly characterized by pre-capillary hemodynamics and Group 2 clinical classification. Mild PH is associated with an intermediate prognosis: outcomes are more favorable than in conventional PH but inferior to no PH (HR 1.74 [95% CI 1.15-2.61]). While the two PH phenotypes appear to share comorbidity-related factors, hemodynamic parameters were associated with survival outcomes not in mild PH but in conventional PH. Conclusions: The observation that mild PH constitutes approximately one-third of overall PH cases carries substantial clinical weight. The newly identified mild PH cohort was characterized mainly by pre-capillary and Group 2 subtypes. While mild PH is associated with an intermediate prognosis, comorbidities appear to be the primary determinant of outcomes in this group, unlike in conventional PH where hemodynamics play a larger role.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Taya et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Mild pulmonary hypertension (n=1,080). Mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24 mmHg) vs. No pulmonary hypertension (mPAP ≤20 mmHg) was evaluated on Composite outcome of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and lung transplant (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.15-2.61, p=<0.05). Mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24 mmHg) was associated with a 74% higher risk of the composite outcome of mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and lung transplant compared to no pulmonary hypertension (HR 1.74).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: