Evidence Hub

Haemodynamic spectrum in heritable pulmonary arterial hypertension: a continuum from pre-capillary to combined pulmonary hypertension-case series

Martín de Miguel I, Cruz Utrilla A, Segura de La Cal T, Sarnago Cebada F, Velázquez Martín M, Jiménez López-Guarch C, Arribas Ynsaurriaga F, Escribano Subías P

European heart journal. Case reports, 2025

Abstract

Background: Heritable pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare form of pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension that typically affects young patients. With increased survival and subsequent ageing of these patients, newly acquired cardiovascular conditions may influence the pulmonary haemodynamic profile and impact management.

Case summary: We report a case series of four patients with mutations in genes associated with PAH to illustrate the spectrum of pulmonary haemodynamics under the influence of superimposed acquired conditions. The first two cases involve patients with a long-standing diagnosis of heritable PAH and severe pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension, who developed overt left-sided diastolic dysfunction later in follow-up due to the acquisition of multiple cardiovascular comorbidities. The second two cases describe patients with a genetic pre-disposition to develop PAH and conditions that are risk factors for left heart disease, with mild elevation of resting pulmonary pressures, in whom exercise right heart catheterization unmasked occult left-sided diastolic dysfunction.

Discussion: Pulmonary haemodynamics are complex and dynamic over time, even in patients with or at risk of heritable PAH, when additional acquired cardiovascular conditions emerge. Correct phenotyping at diagnosis and during follow-up of patients at risk of heritable PAH, along with a clear understanding of the underlying pulmonary haemodynamic profile, is crucial for appropriate management.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free