Respiratory research · 2024
Cardiopulmonary exercise test to detect cardiac dysfunction from pulmonary vascular disease.
ОбзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alotaibi Mona, Yang Jenny Z, Papamatheakis Demosthenes G, McGuire W Cameron, Fernandes Timothy M, Morris Timothy A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cardiac dysfunction from pulmonary vascular disease causes characteristic findings on cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). We tested the accuracy of CPET for detecting inadequate stroke volume (SV) augmentation during exercise, a pivotal manifestation of cardiac limitation in patients with pulmonary vascular disease.
METHODS: We reviewed patients with suspected pulmonary vascular disease in whom CPET and right heart catheterization (RHC) measurements were taken at rest and at anaerobic threshold (AT). We correlated CPET-determined O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest with RHC-determined SVAT/SVrest. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest to detect SVAT/SVrest below the lower limit of normal (LLN). For comparison, we performed similar analyses comparing echocardiographically-measured peak tricuspid regurgitant velocity (TRVpeak) with SVAT/SVrest.
RESULTS: From July 2018 through February 2023, 83 simultaneous RHC and CPET were performed. Thirty-six studies measured O2·pulse and SV at rest and at AT. O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest correlated highly with SVAT/SVrest (r = 0.72, 95% CI 0.52, 0.85; p < 0.0001), whereas TRVpeak did not (r = -0.09, 95% CI -0.47, 0.33; p = 0.69). The AUROC to detect SVAT/SVrest below the LLN was significantly higher for O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest (0.92, SE 0.04; p = 0.0002) than for TRVpeak (0.69, SE 0.10; p = 0.12). O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest of less than 2.6 was 92.6% sensitive (95% CI 76.6%, 98.7%) and 66.7% specific (95% CI 35.2%, 87.9%) for deficient SVAT/SVrest.
CONCLUSIONS: CPET detected deficient SV augmentation more accurately than echocardiography. CPET-determined O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest may have a prominent role for noninvasive screening of patients at risk for pulmonary vascular disease, such as patients with persistent dyspnea after pulmonary embolism.
METHODS: We reviewed patients with suspected pulmonary vascular disease in whom CPET and right heart catheterization (RHC) measurements were taken at rest and at anaerobic threshold (AT). We correlated CPET-determined O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest with RHC-determined SVAT/SVrest. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest to detect SVAT/SVrest below the lower limit of normal (LLN). For comparison, we performed similar analyses comparing echocardiographically-measured peak tricuspid regurgitant velocity (TRVpeak) with SVAT/SVrest.
RESULTS: From July 2018 through February 2023, 83 simultaneous RHC and CPET were performed. Thirty-six studies measured O2·pulse and SV at rest and at AT. O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest correlated highly with SVAT/SVrest (r = 0.72, 95% CI 0.52, 0.85; p < 0.0001), whereas TRVpeak did not (r = -0.09, 95% CI -0.47, 0.33; p = 0.69). The AUROC to detect SVAT/SVrest below the LLN was significantly higher for O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest (0.92, SE 0.04; p = 0.0002) than for TRVpeak (0.69, SE 0.10; p = 0.12). O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest of less than 2.6 was 92.6% sensitive (95% CI 76.6%, 98.7%) and 66.7% specific (95% CI 35.2%, 87.9%) for deficient SVAT/SVrest.
CONCLUSIONS: CPET detected deficient SV augmentation more accurately than echocardiography. CPET-determined O2·pulseAT/O2·pulserest may have a prominent role for noninvasive screening of patients at risk for pulmonary vascular disease, such as patients with persistent dyspnea after pulmonary embolism.