AimsExercise oscillatory ventilation (EOV) is a pivotal cardiopulmonary exercise test parameter for the prognostic evaluation of patients with chronic heart failure (HF). It has been described in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (<40%, HFrEF) and with HF with preserved ejection fraction (>50%, HFpEF), but no data are available for patients with HF with mid‐range ejection fraction (40–49%, HFmrEF). The aim of the study was to evaluate the prognostic role of EOV in HFmrEF patients.Methods and resultsWe analysed 1239 patients with HFmrEF and 4482 patients with HFrEF, enrolled in the MECKI score database, with a 2‐year follow‐up. The study endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death, urgent heart transplant, and ventricular assist device implantation. We identified EOV in 968 cases (16% and 17% of cases in HFmrEF and HFrEF,respectively). HFrEF EOV+ patients were significantly older, and their parameters suggested a more severe HF than HFrEF EOV− patients. A similar behaviour was found in HFmrEF EOV+ vs. EOV− patients. Kaplan–Meier analysis, irrespective of ejection fraction, showed that EOV is associated with a worse survival, and that patients with HFrEF and HFmrEF EOV+ had a significantly worse outcome than the EOV− of the same ejection fraction groups. EOV‐associated survival differences in HFmrEF patients started after 18 months of follow‐up.ConclusionExercise oscillatory ventilation has a similar prevalence and ominous prognostic value in both HFmrEF and HFrEF patients, indicating a group of patients in need of a more intensive follow‐up and a more aggressive therapy. In HFmrEF, the survival curves between EOV+ and EOV− patients diverged only after 18 months.
Aims Ventilation vs. carbon dioxide production (VE/VCO2) is among the strongest cardiopulmonary exercise testing prognostic parameters in heart failure (HF). It is usually reported as an absolute value. The current definition of normal VE/VCO2 slope values is inadequate, since it was built from small groups of subjects with a particularly limited number of women and elderly. We aimed to define VE/VCO2 slope prediction formulas in a sizable population and to test whether the prognostic power of VE/VCO2 slope in HF was different if expressed as a percentage of the predicted value or as an absolute value. Methods and results We calculated the linear regressions between age and VE/VCO2 slope in 1136 healthy subjects (68% male, age 44.9 ± 14.5, range 13–83 years). We then applied age‐adjusted and sex‐adjusted formulas to predict VE/VCO2 slope to HF patients included in the metabolic exercise test data combined with cardiac and kidney indexes score database, which counts 6112 patients (82% male, age 61.4 ± 12.8, left ventricular ejection fraction 33.2 ± 10.5%, peakVO2 14.8 ± 4.9, mL/min/kg, VE/VCO2 slope 32.7 ± 7.7) from 24 HF centres. Finally, we evaluated whether the use of absolute values vs. percentages of predicted VE/VCO2 affected HF prognosis prediction (composite of cardiovascular mortality + urgent transplant or left ventricular assist device). We did so in the entire cardiac and kidney indexes score population and separately in HF patients with severe (peakVO2 < 14 mL/min/kg, n = 2919, 61.1 events/1000 pts/year) or moderate (peakVO2 ≥ 14 mL/min/kg, n = 3183, 19.9 events/1000 pts/year) HF. In the healthy population, we obtained the following equations: female, VE/VCO2 = 0.052 × Age + 23.808 (r = 0.192); male, VE/VCO2 = 0.095 × Age + 20.227 (r = 0.371) (P = 0.007). We applied these formulas to calculate the percentages of predicted VE/VCO2 values. The 2‐year survival prognostic power of VE/VCO2 slope was strong, and it was similar if expressed as absolute value or as a percentage of predicted value (AUCs 0.686 and 0.690, respectively). In contrast, in severe HF patients, AUCs significantly differed between absolute values (0.637) and percentages of predicted values (0.650, P = 0.0026). Moreover, VE/VCO2 slope expressed as a percentage of predicted value allowed to reclassify 6.6% of peakVO2 < 14 mL/min/kg patients (net reclassification improvement = 0.066, P = 0.0015). Conclusions The percentage of predicted VE/VCO2 slope value strengthens the prognostic power of VE/VCO2 in severe HF patients, and it should be preferred over the absolute value for HF prognostication. Furthermore, the widespread use of VE/VCO2 slope expressed as percentage of predicted value can improve our ability to identify HF patients at high risk, which is a goal of utmost clinical relevance.
Aims The anaerobic threshold (AT) is an important cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) parameter both in healthy and in patients. It is normally determined with three approaches: V-slope method, ventilatory equivalent method, and end-tidal method. The finding of different AT values with these methods is only anecdotic. We defined the presence of a double threshold (DT) when a ΔVO2 > 15 mL/min was observed between the V-slope method (met AT) and the other two methods (vent AT). The aim was to identify whether there is a DT in healthy subjects. Methods and results We retrospectively analysed 476 healthy subjects who performed CPET in our laboratory between 2009 and 2018. We identified 51 subjects with a DT (11% of cases). Cardiopulmonary exercise test data at rest and during the exercise were not different in subjects with DT compared to those without. Met AT always preceded vent AT. Compared to subjects without DT, those with DT showed at met AT lower carbon dioxide output (VCO2), end-tidal carbon dioxide tension (PetCO2) and respiratory exchange ratio (RER), and higher ventilatory equivalent for carbon dioxide (VE/VCO2). Compared to met AT, vent AT showed a higher oxygen uptake (VO2), VCO2, ventilation, respiratory rate, RER, work rate, and PetCO2 but a lower VE/VCO2 and end-tidal oxygen tension. Finally, subjects with DT showed a higher VO2 increase during the isocapnic buffering period. Conclusion Double threshold was present in healthy subjects. The presence of DT does not influence peak exercise performance, but it is associated with a delayed before acidosis-induced hyperventilation.
Aims Practice guidelines recommend sacubitril/valsartan for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The aim of our study was to describe the use of sacubitril/valsartan in real-world clinical practice to help identify patients best able to tolerate titration to higher doses. Methods We retrospectively analyzed clinical data for 201 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction prescribed sacubitril/valsartan at our heart failure clinic (Centro Cardiologico Monzino) between September 2016/December 2018. Patients had a mean age of 67.2 years, mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 30.1%, New York Heart Association class II (65%), class III (35%), and poor cardiopulmonary exercise capacity. Median 2-year risk of death/urgent cardiac transplantation was 8.9% [Metabolic Exercise Cardiac Kidney Index (MECKI) score]. Results After a median follow-up of 230 (interquartile interval: 105–366) days, 57 patients achieved higher-dose sacubitril/valsartan, 103 tolerated medium/low doses, nine died, and 20 interrupted treatment. The highest dose of sacubitril/valsartan was reached by younger patients with better hemoglobin (Hb) levels, renal function, and blood pressure (BP). Patients continuing on sacubitril/valsartan had significantly higher serum Hb and sodium, better BP, and lower MECKI scores than patients who discontinued treatment or died during follow-up. Our patients were older and frailer than those in the pivotal PARADIGM-HF trial. Conclusion In our experience, more than one-third of the patients were able to tolerate the higher dose of sacubitril/valsartan, and these patients were younger, had higher Hb, and better BP and renal function. MECKI score stratification was useful to discriminate patients who continued treatment from those who did not. Future prospective studies should test if these clinical variables can guide the up-titration of sacubitril/valsartan.
Background Inert gas rebreathing has been recently described as an emergent reliable non-invasive method for cardiac output determination during exercise, allowing a relevant improvement of cardiopulmonary exercise test clinical relevance. For cardiac output measurements by inert gas rebreathing, specific respiratory manoeuvres are needed which might affect pivotal cardiopulmonary exercise test parameters, such as exercise tolerance, oxygen uptake and ventilation vs carbon dioxide output (VE/VCO2) relationship slope. Method We retrospectively analysed cardiopulmonary exercise testing of 181 heart failure patients who underwent both cardiopulmonary exercise testing and cardiopulmonary exercise test+cardiac output within two months (average 16 ± 15 days). All patients were in stable clinical conditions (New York Heart Association I–III) and on optimal medical therapy. Results The majority of patients were in New York Heart Association Class I and II (78.8%), with a mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 31 ± 10%. No difference was found between the two tests in oxygen uptake at peak exercise (1101 (interquartile range 870–1418) ml/min at cardiopulmonary exercise test vs 1103 (844–1389) at cardiopulmonary exercise test-cardiac output) and at anaerobic threshold. However, anaerobic threshold and peak heart rate, peak workload (75 (58–101) watts and 64 (42–90), p < 0.01) and carbon dioxide output were significantly higher at cardiopulmonary exercise testing than at cardiopulmonary exercise test+cardiac output, whereas VE/VCO2 slope was higher at cardiopulmonary exercise test+cardiac output (30 (27–35) vs 33 (28–37), p < 0.01). Conclusion The similar anaerobic threshold and peak oxygen uptake in the two tests with a lower peak workload and higher VE/VCO2 slope at cardiopulmonary exercise test+cardiac output suggest a higher respiratory work and consequent demand for respiratory muscle blood flow secondary to the ventilatory manoeuvres. Accordingly, VE/VCO2 slope and peak workload must be evaluated with caution during cardiopulmonary exercise test+cardiac output.
ObjectivesReduced cardiac output (CO) has been considered crucial in symptoms’ genesis in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Absolute value and temporal behaviour of O2-pulse (oxygen uptake/heart rate (VO2/HR)), and the VO2/work relationship during exercise reflect closely stroke volume (SV) and CO changes, respectively. We hypothesise that adding O2-pulse absolute value and kinetics, and VO2/work relationship to standard cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) could help identify more exercise-limited patients with HCM.MethodsCPETs were performed in 3 HCM dedicated clinical units. We retrospectively enrolled non-end-stage consecutive patients with HCM, grouped according to left ventricle outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO) at rest or during Valsalva manoeuvre (72% of patients with LVOTO <30; 10% between 30 and 49 and 18% ≥50 mm Hg). We evaluated the CPET response in HCM focusing on parameters strongly associated with SV and CO, such as O2-pulse and VO2, respectively, considering their absolute values and temporal behaviour during exercise.ResultsWe included 312 patients (70% males, age 49±18 years). Peak VO2 (percentage of predicted), O2-pulse and ventilation to carbon dioxide production (VE/VCO2) slope did not change across LVOTO groups. Ninety-six (31%) patients with HCM presented an abnormal O2-pulse temporal behaviour, irrespective of LVOTO values. These patients showed lower peak systolic pressure, workload (106±45 vs 130±49 W), VO2 (21.3±6.6 vs 24.1±7.7 mL/min/kg; 74%±17% vs 80%±20%) and O2-pulse (12 (9–14) vs 14 (11–17) mL/beat), with higher VE/VCO2 slope (28 (25–31) vs 27 (24–31)) (p<0.005 for all). Only 2 patients had an abnormal VO2/work slope.ConclusionNone of the frequently used CPET parameters, either as absolute values or dynamic relationships, were associated with LVOTO. Differently, an abnormal temporal behaviour of O2-pulse during exercise, which is strongly related to inadequate SV increase, correlates with reduced functional capacity (peak and anaerobic threshold VO2 and workload) and increased VE/VCO2 slope, identifying more advanced disease irrespectively of LVOTO.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.