Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 572

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Long-Term Treatment of Primary Pulmonary Hypertension with Aerosolized Iloprost, a Prostacyclin Analogue

Open access
Hoeper, Marius M., Schwarze, Michael, Ehlerding, Stefan, Adler-Schuermeyer, Angelika, Spiekerkoetter, Edda, Niedermeyer, Jost, Hamm, Michael, Fabel, Helmut·2000·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Continuous intravenous infusion of epoprostenol (prostacyclin) is an effective treatment for primary pulmonary hypertension. This approach requires the insertion of a permanent central venous catheter, with the associated risk of serious complications. Recently, aerosolized iloprost, a stable prostacyclin analogue, has been introduced as an alternative therapy for severe pulmonary hypertension. METHODS: We evaluated the effects of aerosolized iloprost on exercise capacity and hemodynamic variables over a one-year period in patients with primary pulmonary hypertension. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients with primary pulmonary hypertension received aerosolized iloprost at a daily dose of 100 or 150 microg for at least one year. The mean (+/-SD) distance covered in the six-minute walk test increased from 278+/-96 m at base line to 363+/-135 m after 12 months (P<0.001). During the same period, the mean pulmonary arterial pressure before the inhalation of iloprost declined from 59+/-10 mm Hg to 52+/-15 mm Hg (P=0.006), cardiac output increased from 3.8+/-1.4 liters per minute to 4.4+/-1.3 liters per minute (P=0.02), and pulmonary vascular resistance declined from 1205+/-467 dyn x sec x cm(-5) to 925+/-469 dyn x sec x cm(-5) (P<0.001). The treatment was generally well tolerated, except for mild coughing, minor headache, and jaw pain in some patients. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with aerosolized iloprost is safe and has sustained effects on exercise capacity and pulmonary hemodynamics in patients with primary pulmonary hypertension.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm200006223422503

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 572

Metadata

Authors
Hoeper, M. M., Schwarze, M., Ehlerding, S., Adler-Schuermeyer, A., Spiekerkoetter, E., Niedermeyer, J., Hamm, M., & Fabel, H.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2000-06-22
Volume
342
Issue
25
Pages
1866-1870
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1990345361
Cited by
572
References
0
FWCI
44.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Long-Term Treatment of Primary Pulmonary Hypertension with Aerosolized Iloprost, a Prostacyclin Analogue. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm200006223422503
The paper
Hoeper, M. M., Schwarze, M., Ehlerding, S., Adler-Schuermeyer, A., Spiekerkoetter, E., Niedermeyer, J., Hamm, M., & Fabel, H. (2000). Long-Term Treatment of Primary Pulmonary Hypertension with Aerosolized Iloprost, a Prostacyclin Analogue. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm200006223422503

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.