Abstract:The extent to which pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) experts share common practice patterns that are in alignment with published expert consensus recommendations is unknown. Our objective was to characterize the clinical management strategies used by an international cohort of self-identified PAH experts. A 32-item questionnaire composed mainly of rank order or Likert scale questions was distributed via the Internet (August 5, 2013, through January 20, 2014 to four international pulmonary vascular disease organizations. The survey respondents (N ¼ 105) were field experts reporting 11.6 AE 8.7 years of PAH experience. Likert scale responses (1 ¼ disagree, 7 ¼ agree) were 3.0-5.0, indicating a disparity in opinions, for 78% of questions. Respondent (dis)agreement scores were 4.4 AE 2.2 for use of expert recommendations to determine catheterization timing in PAH. For PAH patients without cardiogenic shock or known vasoreactivity status, the most and least preferred first-line therapies (1 ¼ most preferred, 5 ¼ least preferred) were phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE-Vi) and subcutaneous prostacyclin analogues, respectively (1.4 AE 0.8 vs. 4.0 AE 1.1; P < 0.05). Compared with US-practicing clinicians (N ¼ 46), non-US-practicing clinicians (N ¼ 57) favored collaboration between cardiology and pulmonary medicine for clinical decision making (1 ¼ disagree, 7 ¼ agree; 3.1 AE 2.2 vs. 4.8 AE 2.2; P < 0.0001) and PDE-Vi (6.5% vs. 22.4%) as first-line therapy for PAH patients with cardiogenic shock but were less likely to perform vasoreactivity testing in patients with lung diseaseinduced pulmonary hypertension (4.3 AE 2.1 vs. 2.2 AE 1.6; P < 0.0001). In conclusion, practice patterns among PAH experts diverge from consensus recommendations and differ by practice location, suggesting that opportunity may exist to improve care quality for this highly morbid cardiopulmonary disease.