Pro-Con debate session 1
A PVRI 2024 Digital webinar
Presentations
- A hopeless cause: The pulmonary vasculature is largely gone and irredeemable in PAH, Peter Dorfmüller
- Remnants of lost pulmonary vasculature may be re-engaged in PAH, Duncan Stewart
- Patients with mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24) should be treated with PAH approved drugs, David Systrom
- Patients with mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24) should NOT be treated with PAH approved drugs, Roham Zamanian
Polls
Topic A
Which statement do you agree with?
PRO: A hopeless cause: The pulmonary vasculature is largely gone and irredeemable in PAH - 12.82%
CON: Remnants of lost pulmonary vasculature may be re-engaged in PAH - 87.18%
2. Now you have heard the debate, which statement do you agree with?
PRO: A hopeless cause: The pulmonary vasculature is largely gone and irredeemable in PAH - 5%
CON: Remnants of lost pulmonary vasculature may be re-engaged in PAH - 95%
Topic B
3. Which statement do you agree with?
PRO: Patients with mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24) should be treated with PAH approved drugs - 69%
CON: Patients with mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24) should NOT be treated with PAH approved drugs - 31%
4. Now you have heard the debate, which statement do you agree with?
PRO: Patients with mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24) should be treated with PAH approved drugs - 45.16%
CON: Patients with mild pulmonary hypertension (mPAP 21-24) should NOT be treated with PAH approved drugs - 54.84%