Recognition, diagnosis, and operability assessment of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH): A global cross‐sectional scientific survey (CLARITY)

• Published in: Pulmonary circulation Vol. 14; no. 1; pp. e12330 - n/a
• Main Authors: Kopeć, Grzegorz, Forfia, Paul, Abe, Kohtaro, Beaudet, Amélie, Gressin, Virginie, Jevnikar, Mitja, Meijer, Catherina, Tan, Yan Zhi, Moiseeva, Olga, Sheares, Karen, Skoro‐Sajer, Nika, Terra‐Filho, Mario, Whitford, Helen, Zhai, Zhenguo, Heresi, Gustavo A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.01.2024; John Wiley and Sons Inc; Wiley
• Subjects: chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension; Clinical medicine; clinical practice; diagnosis; Medical referrals; pulmonary embolism; Pulmonary hypertension; Thromboembolism; South America; Middle East; Asia; North America; Europe; Africa; chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension; clinical practice; diagnosis; pulmonary embolism; pulmonary hypertension
• ISSN: 2045-8940; 2045-8932; 2045-8940
• DOI: 10.1002/pul2.12330

Early recognition and diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is crucial for improving prognosis and reducing the disease burden. Established clinical practice guidelines describe interventions for the diagnosis and evaluation of CTEPH, yet limited insight remains into clinical practice variation and barriers to care. The CTEPH global cross‐sectional scientific survey (CLARITY) was developed to gather insights into the current diagnosis, treatment, and management of CTEPH and to identify unmet medical needs. This paper focuses on the recognition and diagnosis of CTEPH and the referral and evaluation of these patients. The survey was offered to hospital‐based medical specialists through Scientific Societies and other medical organizations, from September 2021 to May 2022. Response data from 353 physicians showed that self‐reported awareness of CTEPH increased over the past 10 years among 96% of respondents. Clinical practices in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) follow‐up and CTEPH diagnosis differed among respondents. While 50% of respondents working in a nonexpert center reported to refer patients to an expert pulmonary hypertension/CTEPH center when CTEPH is suspected, 51% of these physicians did not report referral of patients with a confirmed diagnosis for further evaluation. Up to 50% of respondents involved in the evaluation of referred patients have concluded a different operability status than that indicated by the referring center. This study indicates that early diagnosis and timely treatment of CTEPH is challenged by suboptimal acute PE follow‐up and patient referral practices. Nonadherence to guideline recommendations may be impacted by various barriers to care, which were shown to vary by geographical region.