Estimating maximum work rate during cardiopulmonary exercise testing from the six-minute walk distance in patients with heart failure.

Background: Exercise is recommended for patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and its intensity is usually set as a percentage of the maximal work rate (MWR) during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPX) or a symptom-limited incremental test (SLIT). As these tests are not always available in cardiac rehabilitation due to logistic/cost constraints, we aimed to develop a predictive model to estimate MWR at CPX (estMWR@CPX) in CHF patients using anthropometric and clinical measures and the 6-min walk test (6 MWT), the most widely used exercise field test. Methods: This is a multicentre cross-sectional retrospective study in a cardiac rehabilitation setting. Six hundred patients with HF in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I-III underwent both CPX and 6 MWT and, through multivariable linear regression analysis, we defined several predictive models to define estMWR@CPX. Results: The best model included 6 MWT, sex, age, weight, NYHA class, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), smoking status and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease COPD (adjusted R2 = 0.55; 95% LoA -39 to 33 W). When LVEF was excluded as a predictor, the resulting model performed only slightly worse (adjusted R2 = 0.54; 95% LoA -42 to 34 W). Only in 34% of cases was the percentage difference between estMWR@CPX and real MWR@CPX <10% in absolute value. EstMWR@CPX tended to overestimate low values and underestimate high values of true MWR@CPX. Conclusions: Our results showed a lack of accuracy in the predictive model evaluated; therefore, for an accurate prescription of cycle-ergometer exercise training, it is necessary to assess MWR by CPX or SLIT.

What about chronotropic incompetence in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction? Clinical and prognostic implications from the Metabolic Exercise combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes score dataset.

AIMS: Chronotropic incompetence (CI) is a strong predictor of outcome in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, however no data on its clinical and prognostic impacts in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) are available. Therefore, the study aims to investigate, in a large multicentre HFmrEF cohort, the prevalence of CI as well as its relationship with exercise capacity and its prognostic role over the cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) parameters. METHODS AND RESULTS: Within the Metabolic Exercise combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) database, we analysed data of 864 HFmrEF out of 1164 stable outpatients who performed a maximal CPET at the cycle ergometer and who had no significant rhythm disorders or comorbidities. The primary study endpoint was cardiovascular (CV) death. All-cause death was also explored. Chronotropic incompetence prevalence differed depending on the method (peak heart rate, pHR% vs. pHR reserve, pHRR%) and the cut-off adopted (pHR% from ≤75% to ≤60% and pHRR% ≤ 65% to ≤50%), ranging from 11% to 62%. A total of 84 (9.7%) CV deaths were collected, with 39 (4.5%) occurring within 5 years. At multivariate analysis, both pHR% [hazard ratio 0.97 (0.95-0.99), P < 0.05] and pHRR% [hazard ratio 0.977 (0.961-0.993), P < 0.01] were associated with the primary endpoint. A pHR% ≤ 75% and a pHRR% ≤ 50% represented the most accurate cut-off values in predicting the outcome. CONCLUSION: The study suggests an association between blunted exercise-HR response, functional capacity, and CV death risk among patients with HFmrEF. Whether the CI presence might be adopted in daily HFmrEF management needs to be addressed in larger prospective studies.

Chronotropic incompetence is an easy-to-obtain additive parameter for cardiovascular death risk stratification in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF). Peak heart rate and peak heart rate reserve are associated with exercise capacity in HFmrEF. Peak heart rate and peak heart rate reserve are associated with cardiovascular death in HFmrEF.

Heart failure patients with improved ejection fraction: Insights from the MECKI score database.

AIMS: Improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction is a major goal of heart failure (HF) treatment. However, data on clinical characteristics, exercise performance and prognosis in HF patients who improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF) are scarce. The study aimed to determine whether HFimpEF patients have a distinct clinical phenotype, biology and prognosis than HF patients with persistently reduced ejection fraction (pHFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 7948 patients enrolled in the Metabolic Exercise Cardiac Kidney Indexes (MECKI) score database were evaluated (median follow-up of 1490 days). We analysed clinical, laboratory, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, exercise, and survival data from HFimpEF (n = 1504) and pHFrEF (n = 6017) patients. The primary endpoint of the study was the composite of cardiovascular death, left ventricular assist device implantation, and urgent heart transplantation. HFimpEF patients had lower HF severity: left ventricular ejection fraction 44.0 [41.0-47.0] versus 29.7 [24.1-34.5]%, B-type natriuretic peptide 122 [65-296] versus 373 [152-888] pg/ml, haemoglobin 13.5 [12.2-14.6] versus 13.7 [12.5-14.7] g/dl, renal function by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation 72.0 [56.7-89.3] versus 70.4 [54.5-85.3] ml/min, peak oxygen uptake 62.2 [50.7-74.1] versus 52.6 [41.8-64.3]% predicted, minute ventilation-to-carbon dioxide output slope 30.0 [26.9-34.4] versus 32.1 [28.0-38.0] in HFimpEF and pHFrEF, respectively (p < 0.001 for all). Cardiovascular mortality rates were 26.6 and 46.9 per 1000 person-years for HFimpEF and pHFrEF, respectively (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that HFimpEF had better a long-term prognosis compared with pHFrEF patients. After adjustment for variables differentiating HFimpEF from pHFrEF, except echocardiographic parameters, the Kaplan-Meier curves showed the same prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Heart failure with improved ejection fraction represents a peculiar group of HF patients whose clinical, laboratory, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and exercise characteristics parallel the recovery of systolic function. Nonetheless, these patients remain at risk for adverse outcome.

Standardised Exercise Prescription for Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndrome and/or Heart Failure: A Consensus Statement from the EXPERT Working Group.

Whereas exercise training, as part of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, is a key component in the management of patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) and/or congestive heart failure (CHF), physicians and exercise professionals disagree among themselves on the type and characteristics of the exercise to be prescribed to these patients, and the exercise prescriptions are not consistent with the international guidelines. This impacts the efficacy and quality of the intervention of rehabilitation. To overcome these barriers, a digital training and decision support system [i.e. EXercise Prescription in Everyday practice & Rehabilitative Training (EXPERT) tool], i.e. a stepwise aid to exercise prescription in patients with CCS and/or CHF, affected by concomitant risk factors and comorbidities, in the setting of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, was developed. The EXPERT working group members reviewed the literature and formulated exercise recommendations (exercise training intensity, frequency, volume, type, session and programme duration) and safety precautions for CCS and/or CHF (including heart transplantation). Also, highly prevalent comorbidities (e.g. peripheral arterial disease) or cardiac devices (e.g. pacemaker, implanted cardioverter defibrillator, left-ventricular assist device) were considered, as well as indications for the in-hospital phase (e.g. after coronary revascularisation or hospitalisation for CHF). The contributions of physical fitness, medications and adverse events during exercise testing were also considered. The EXPERT tool was developed on the basis of this evidence. In this paper, the exercise prescriptions for patients with CCS and/or CHF formulated for the EXPERT tool are presented. Finally, to demonstrate how the EXPERT tool proposes exercise prescriptions in patients with CCS and/or CHF with different combinations of CVD risk factors, three patient cases with solutions are presented.

International validation of the Metabolic Exercise test data combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) score in heart failure.

AIMS: Current European heart failure (HF) guidelines suggest the use of risk score: among them, the Metabolic Exercise test data combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) score has demonstrated to be one of the most accurate. However, the risk scores are still poorly implemented in clinical practice, also due to the lack of strong evidence regarding their external validation in different populations. Thus, the current study was designed as an external validation test of the MECKI score in an international multicentre setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of patients diagnosed with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) across international centres (not Italian), retrospectively recruited. Collected data included demographics, HF aetiology, laboratory testing, electrocardiogram (ECG), echocardiographic findings, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) results as described in the original MECKI score publication. A total of 1042 patients across 8 international centres (7 European and 1 Asian) were included and followed up from 1998 till 2019. Patients were divided according to the calculated MECKI scores into three subgroups: (i) MECKI score <10%, (ii) 10-20%, and (iii) ≥ 20%. Survival analysis comparison among the three MECKI score subgroups showed a worse prognosis in patients with higher MECKI score value: median event-free survival times were 4396 days for MECKI score <10%, 3457 days for 10-20%, and 1022 days for ≥20% (P < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the ROC curves (AUC) were like those reported in the original internal validation studies. CONCLUSION: In patients diagnosed with HFrEF, the power of the MECKI score was confirmed in terms of prognosis and risk stratification, supporting its implementation as advised by the HF guidelines.

In patients diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the Metabolic Exercise test data combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) risk score underwent an external validation. The MECKI score prognostic power was confirmed in a large population of patients from Europe and Asia. These data support MECKI score implementation, as advised by the 2021 European heart failure guidelines.

Functional outcome after cardiac rehabilitation and its association with survival in heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence regarding the effects of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). METHODS: We studied 1784 patients admitted to inpatient CR. The patients were grouped into HFpEF (EF≥0.50), HF with mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF; EF 41-49), and HF with reduced EF (HFrEF; EF≤0.40). A standardized 6-min walking test was performed at admission and discharge. Measures of functional outcome were: (1) absolute increase in 6-min walking distance (6MWD) from admission to discharge >50 m and (2) increase in 6MWD to ≥300 among the patients who walked <300 m at admission. RESULTS: After adjustment, the patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF were as likely as those with HFrEF to achieve an increase in 6MWD >50 m (odds ratio 0.95 [95%CI 0.71-1.24; p=0.648] and 1.04 [95%CI 0.77-1.41; p=0.769], respectively) or an increase in 6MWD to ≥300 m (odds ratio 0.79 [95%CI 0.51-1.23; p=0.299] and 0.65 [95%CI 0.38-1.12; p=0.118], respectively). The adjusted hazard ratio of 5-year mortality for patients who achieved an increase in 6MWD >50 m was 0.60 (95%CI 0.51-0.71; p<0.001) and that for patients who achieved an increase in 6MWD at discharge to ≥300 m 0.61 (95%CI 0.48-0.79; p<0.001). In each EF group, both outcomes remained independently associated with improved survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF are as likely as those with HFrEF to benefit from CR in terms of functional improvement. Functional improvement was independently associated with improved long-term survival, regardless of EF.

Does moderate hyperkalemia influence survival in HF? Insights from the MECKI score data base.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic role of moderate hyperkalemia in reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients is still controversial. Despite this, it affects the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) with therapy down-titration or discontinuation. OBJECTIVES: Aim of the study was to assess the prognostic impact of moderate hyperkalemia in chronic HFrEF optimally treated patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analyzed MECKI (Metabolic Exercise test data combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes) database, with median follow-up of 4.2 [IQR 1.9-7.5] years. Data on K+ levels were available in 7087 cases. Patients with K+ plasma level ≥ 5.6 mEq/L and < 4 mEq/L were excluded. Remaining patients were categorized into normal >4 and < 5 mEq/L (n = 4826, 68%) and moderately high ≥5.0 and ≤ 5.5 mEq/L (n = 496, 7%) K+. Then patients were matched by propensity score in 484 couplets of patients. MECKI score value was 7% [IQR 3.1-14.1%] and 7.3% [IQR 3.4-15%] (p = 0.678) in patients with normal and moderately high K+ values while cardiovascular mortality events at two years follow-up were 41 (4.2%) and 33 (3.4%) (p = 0.333) in each group respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate hyperkalemia does not influence patients' outcome in a large cohort of ambulatory HFrEF patients.

Exploring the Prognostic Performance of MECKI Score in Heart Failure Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Treated with Edoxaban.

INTRODUCTION: Risk stratification in heart failure (HF) is essential for clinical and therapeutic management. The Metabolic Exercise test data combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) score is a validated prognostic model for assessing cardiovascular risk in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). From the validation of the score, the prevalence of HF patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as edoxaban, for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) has been increasing in recent years. This study aims to evaluate the reliability of the MECKI score in HFrEF patients treated with edoxaban for NVAF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included consecutive outpatients with HF and NVAF treated with edoxaban (n = 83) who underwent a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET). They were matched by propensity score with a retrospective group of HFrEF patients with NVAF treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) from the MECKI score registry (n = 844). The study endpoint was the risk of cardiovascular mortality, urgent heart transplantation, or Left Ventricle Assist Device (LVAD) implantation. RESULTS: Edoxaban patients were treated with a more optimized HF therapy and had different clinical characteristics, with a similar MECKI score. After propensity score, 77 patients treated with edoxaban were successfully matched with the MECKI-VKA control cohort. In both groups, MECKI accurately predicted the composite endpoint with similar area under the curves (AUC = 0.757 vs. 0.829 in the MECKI-VKA vs. edoxaban-treated group, respectively, p = 0.452). The two populations' survival appeared non-significantly different at the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: this study confirms the prognostic accuracy of the MECKI score in HFrEF patients with NVAF treated with edoxaban, showing improved predictive power compared to VKA-treated patients.

Cardiac Rehabilitation for Older Women with Heart Failure.

Background: the role that sex plays in impacting cardiac rehabilitation (CR) outcomes remains an important gap in knowledge. Methods: we assessed sex differences in clinical and functional outcomes in 2345 older patients with heart failure (HF) admitted to inpatient CR. Three outcomes were considered: (1) the composite outcome of death during the index admission to CR or transfer to acute care; (2) three-year mortality; (3) change in six-minute walking distance (6MWD) from admission to discharge. Sex differences in outcomes were assessed using multivariable Cox or logistic regression models. Results: the hazard ratios of the composite outcome and of three-year mortality for females vs. males were 0.71 (95%CI:0.50−1.00; p = 0.049) and 0.68 (95%CI:0.59−0.79; p < 0.001), respectively. The standardized mean difference in 6MWD increase from admission to discharge between males and females was 0.10. The odds ratio of achieving an increase in 6MWD at discharge to values higher than the optimal sex-specific thresholds for predicting mortality for females vs. males was 2.21 (95%CI:1.53−3.20; p < 0.001). Conclusion: our findings suggest that older females with HF undergoing CR have better prognosis and garner similar improvement in 6MWD compared with their male counterparts. Nonetheless, females were more likely to achieve levels of functional capacity predictive of improved survival.

Revisiting a Prognosticating Algorithm from Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Chronic Heart Failure (from the MECKI Score Population).

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing is a prognostic tool in heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). Prognosticating algorithms have been proposed, but none has been validated. In 2017, a predictive algorithm, based on peak oxygen consumption (VO2), ventilatory response to exercise (ventilation [VE] carbon dioxide production [VCO2], the VE/VCO2 slope), exertional oscillatory ventilation (EOV), and peak respiratory exchange ratio, was recommended, according treatment with ß blockers: patients with HFrEF registered in the metabolic exercise test data combined with cardiac and kidney indexes (MECKIs) database were used to validated this algorithm. According to the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 4,683 MECKI patients with HFrEF were enrolled. At 3 years follow-up, the end point was cardiovascular death and urgent heart transplantation (cardiovascular events [CV]). CV events occurred in 25% in patients without ß blockers, whereas those with ß-blockers had 11% (p <0.0001). In patients without ß blockers, 36%, 24%, and 7% CV events were observed in those with peak VO2 ≤10, with peak VO2 >10 <18, and with peak VO2 ≥18 ml/kg/min (p = 0.0001), respectively; in MECKI patients with peak VO2 ≤10 and patients with intermediate exercise capacity, a peak respiratory exchange ratio (≥1.15) and VE/VCO2 slope (≥35) were diriment, respectively (p = 0.0001). EOV, when occurred, increased risk. In MECKI patients on ß blockers, 29%, 17%, and 8% CV events were noticed in those with a peak VO2 ≤8, with peak VO2 = 8 to 12, and patients with peak VO2 ≥12 ml/kg/min, respectively (p = 0.0000); when EOV was monitored an increment of risk was witnessed. In conclusion, the outcome of this algorithm was confirmed with the MECKI cohort.

Prognostic value of 6-min walk test compared to cardiopulmonary exercise test in patients with severe heart failure.

AIMS: The 6-min walk test (6MWT) and cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) are both predictive in heart failure (HFrEF). Although 6MWT substitutes for CPET in HFrEF patients, as submaximal testing may be preferable, its prognostic superiority still needs to be verified, particularly in regard to beta blockers (BBs). We aimed to compare the prognostic role of CPET and 6MWT and investigate whether BB therapy influences the predictive value. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective study. Advanced HFrEF patients were followed up for 3 years: events were cardiovascular death or urgent heart transplantation. We analyzed the predictive capacity of CPET and 6MWT in patients, and subdivided according to use of BBs. RESULTS: In a group of 251 HFrEF patients, we found a correlation between meters and peak VO2 (r2 = 0.94). Over the 3-year follow-up, 74 events were recorded. Both CPET and 6MWT variables were correlated with outcome at univariate analysis (meter and VE/VCO2 slope, peak VO2, VO2 at ventilatory anaerobic threshold, percentage predicted of peak VO2), but only percentage predicted of peak VO2 (pppVO2) was an independent predictor. In 103 HFrEF patients on BBs (23 nonsurvivors), neither pppVO2 nor meter were predictive, while in 148 patients not treated with BB (51 with events) pppVO2 was selected as an independent prognostic parameter (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: 6MWT is a valid alternative to CPET, although the percentage of predicted of peak VO2 emerged as the strongest predictor. Nonetheless, our results suggest that both functional derived parameters are not predictive among those patients treated with BBs. Further studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Pick Your Threshold: A Comparison Among Different Methods of Anaerobic Threshold Evaluation in Heart Failure Prognostic Assessment.

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice, anaerobic threshold (AT) is used to guide training and rehabilitation programs, to define risk of major thoracic or abdominal surgery, and to assess prognosis in heart failure (HF). AT of oxygen uptake (V.O2; V.O2AT) has been reported as an absolute value (V.O2ATabs), as a percentage of predicted peak V.O2 (V.O2AT%peak_pred), or as a percentage of observed peak V.O2 (V.O2AT%peak_obs). A direct comparison of the prognostic power among these different ways to report AT is missing. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the prognostic power of these different ways to report AT? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we screened data of 7,746 patients with HF with a history of reduced ejection fraction (< 40%) recruited between 1998 and 2020 and enrolled in the Metabolic Exercise Combined With Cardiac and Kidney Indexes register. All patients underwent a maximum cardiopulmonary exercise test, executed using a ramp protocol on an electronically braked cycle ergometer. RESULTS: This study considered 6,157 patients with HF with identified AT. Follow-up was median, 4.2 years (25th-75th percentiles, 1.9-5.0 years). Both V.O2ATabs (mean ± SD, 823 ± 305 mL/min) and V.O2AT%peak_pred (mean ± SD, 39.6 ± 13.9%), but not V.O2AT%peak_obs (mean ± SD, 69.2 ± 17.7%), well stratified the population regarding prognosis (composite end point: cardiovascular death, urgent heart transplant, or left ventricular assist device). Comparing area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values, V.O2ATabs (0.680) and V.O2AT%peak_pred (0.688) performed similarly, whereas V.O2AT%peak_obs (0.538) was significantly weaker (P < .001). Moreover, the V.O2AT%peak_pred AUC value was the only one performing as well as the AUC based on peak V.O2 (0.710), with an even a higher AUC (0.637 vs 0.618, respectively) in the group with severe HF (peak V.O2 < 12 mL/min/kg). Finally, the combination of V.O2AT%peak_pred with peak V.O2 and V. per CO2 production shows the highest prognostic power. INTERPRETATION: In HF, V.O2AT%peak_pred is the best way to report V.O2 at AT in relationship to prognosis, with a prognostic power comparable to that of peak V.O2 and, remarkably, in patients with severe HF.

Old and new equations for maximal heart rate prediction in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction on beta-blockers treatment: results from the MECKI score data set.

AIMS: Predicting maximal heart rate (MHR) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) still remains a major concern. In such a context, the Keteyian equation is the only one derived in a HFrEF cohort on optimized ß-blockers treatment. Therefore, using the Metabolic Exercise combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) data set, we looked for a possible MHR equation, for an external validation of Keteyien formula and, contextually, for accuracy of the historical MHR formulas and their relationship with the HR measured at the anaerobic threshold (AT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 3487 HFrEF outpatients on optimized ß-blockers treatment from the MECKI data set were analyzed. Besides excluding all possible confounders, the new equation was derived by using HR data coming from maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test. The simplified derived equation was [109-(0.5*age) + (0.5*HR rest) + (0.2*LVEF)-(5 if haemoglobin <11 g/dL)]. The R2 and the standard error of the estimate were 0.24 and 17.5 beats min-1 with a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) = 11.9%. The Keteyian equation had a slightly higher MAPE = 12.3%. Conversely, the Fox and Tanaka equations showed extremely higher MAPE values. The range 75-80% of MHR according to the new and the Keteyian equations was the most accurate in identifying the HR at the AT (MAPEs = 11.3-11.6%). CONCLUSION: The derived equation to estimate the MHR in HFrEF patients, by accounting also for the systolic dysfunction degree and anaemia, improved slightly the Keteyian formula. Both formulas might be helpful in identifying the true maximal effort during an exercise test and the intensity domain during a rehabilitation programme.

Cardiovascular disease patients and predictors of length of stay of residential of cardiac rehabilitation. A specific rehabilitation is mandatory in very old patients?

As more adults are living into old age, they are predisposed to cardiovascular disease (CVD) and the demand for cardiac rehabilitation is increasing. We aimed to verify predictors of length of stay (LOS) in young (Y) vs older (O) vs very old (VO) CVD patients, admitted to residential cardiac rehabilitation. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics at admission, as well as Barthel index (BI), Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), comorbidity severity/complexity, NYHA classification, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), physical activity level were compared in Y (≤65 years) vs O (between >65 and <76 years) vs VO patients (with an age of ≥76 years) against LOS. In 5,070 consecutively CVD patients were included; they were 1392 Y (38%) 1944 O (35%) 1334 VO patients (27%) and LOS duration was 16±7, 19±9 and 22±10 days, respectively (p<0.0001). In Y, LOS was linked to BI (p=0.000) and to LVEF (p=0.000) at multivariable analysis with area under ROC curve of 0.82, whereas in O, LOS was associated to gender (p=0.013) CIRS severity (p=0.000), BI (p=0.000), LVEF (p=0.000), and in those VO to gender (p=0.004), BI (p=0.000) and medical infusion (p=0.000) at multivariable with ROC curve of 0.83 and 0.74, respectively. In very old patients, a prolonged LOS is related to extra-cardiac conditions. Therefore, we promote a specific cardiac rehabilitation for these patients.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing in patients with asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction: lack of prognostic predictive power of ventilatory variables.

AIMS: The indication for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in predictive evaluation has been extended beyond chronic heart failure (HF) patients to include asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction (ALVD) patients, but its prognostic value is still unclear. We aimed to verify if CPET can predict outcome in ALVD and to identify which of the CPET parameters predictive in chronic HF are also effective in ALVD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We screened ALVD (LVEF ≤ 40% without HF symptoms) and HF patients for cardiac death, and compared peak oxygen consumption (pVO2), exertional oscillatory ventilation (EOV), and ventilatory response (VE/VCO2 slope) between survivors and non-survivors. Asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction and HF patients formed the study population (585 ALVD and 695 HF). Both groups had similar male prevalence (98% vs. 98%; P = 0.345) but ALVD patients were younger (52 ± 10 vs. 60 ± 10 years, P = 0.004). Cardiac death was observed in 142 patients (5% of ALVD, 15% of HF). Exertional oscillatory ventilation occurred in 4% of ALVD, whereas VE/VCO2 slope was significantly lower (30 ± 7 vs. 35 ± 4) and pVO2 higher (16 ± 4 vs. 14 ± 3 mL/kg/min) than in chronic HF patients. Asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction non-survivors had a significantly greater EOV incidence (13% vs. 3%, P = 0.003), lower pVO2 (13 ± 4 vs. 16 ± 3 mL/kg/min P = 0.000) and higher VE/VCO2 slope (33 ± 7 vs. 31 ± 5, P = 0.032). No ventilatory parameter had prognostic value at multivariable analysis in ALVD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing can predict events in ALVD patients, but the risk stratification relies on different parameters than in HF patients. Further analysis in a multi-centre trial is required to better quantify the predictive impact of CPET risk parameters in ALVD patients.

Functional capacity assessment and Minimal Clinically Important Difference in post-acute cardiac patients: the role of Short Physical Performance Battery.

BACKGROUND: The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) test is a well-established tool to assess physical performance, and to identify frail patients. Assessment of the SPPB in a specific population of elder patients in cardiac rehabilitation phase after a cardiac event is missing. AIM: The aim of this study was to correlate SPPB and the cardiac rehabilitation outcome in a group of elder patients after a cardiac event and to identify the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) of the SPPB. METHODS: Consecutive (n = 392) patients aged ≥75 years, in the rehabilitation phase after cardiac surgery (70.1%), congestive heart failure (7.4%), or acute coronary syndrome (22.5%), were enrolled. SPPB was performed twice: on admission and discharge. The MCID was assessed with the 'anchor method', and the Patient Global Impression of Change was employed as the anchor. RESULTS: On admission, SPPB classified 56, 117, 116, and 94 patients as severe, moderate, mild, or minimal/no limitations, respectively. Patients with the lower SPPB had the longer length of stay, and the higher complications rate. At receiver operating characteristic analysis, an SPPB improvement >1 was identified as the MCID (area-under-curve 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.85). Overall, 285 patients (74.2%) had a 'clinically significant' improvement in SPPB, with a rate of improvement higher in patients with severe/moderate limitations (83.0%) and lower in those with mild (78.9%) or minimal/no limitations (53.6%). CONCLUSION: A lower SPPB score is associated with a higher complications rate in the post-acute phase. An improvement >1 point of SPPB was identified as the MCID; this reference value could serve as the goal for rehabilitation interventions.

The Future of Exercise-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation for Patients With Heart Failure.

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a comprehensive program that includes exercise training, titration of medical therapy, lifestyle modification, educational support, and psychosocial assessment. All these components are safe and beneficial resulting in significant improvements in quality of life, functional capacity, mortality, and hospital readmission. Current guidelines support its use in a broad spectrum of cardiac disease. This review focuses on exercise-based CR for heart failure (HF) patients in whom CR is a recommended treatment. Exercise should be prescribed according to a personalized approach, optimizing, and tailoring the rehabilitative program to the patient's characteristics. Specific CR programs are dedicated to older patients, those with HF and preserved ejection fraction, and recipients of cardiac implantable electronic devices or left ventricular assistance device. Telemedicine may increase CR participation and overcome some of the barriers that limit its utilization.