Open heart · 2021
Physiological and prognostic differences between types of exercise stress echocardiography for functional mitral regurgitation.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Kagiyama Nobuyuki, Toki Misako, Yuri Takuya, Aritaka Shingo, Hayashida Akihiro, Sengupta Partho P, Yoshida Kiyoshi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) demonstrates dynamic change during exercise. This prospective observational study aimed to compare exercise stress echocardiography (ESE) where handgrip exercise (handgrip-ESE) or semisupine ergometer exercise was performed (ergometer-ESE) for patients with secondary MR.
METHODS: Handgrip-ESE and symptom-limited ergometer-ESE were performed for 53 patients (median age (IQR): 68 (58-78) years; 70% male) on the same day. Baseline global longitudinal strain (GLS) was 9.2% (6.0%-14.0%) and MR volume was 20 (14-26) mL. All-cause death and cardiac hospitalisation were tracked for median 439 (101-507) days.
RESULTS: Handgrip-ESE induced slightly but significantly greater degrees of MR increase (median one grade increase; p<0.001) than ergometer-ESE, although the changes in other parameters, including GLS (+1.1% vs -0.6%, p<0.001), were significantly smaller. Correlations between the two examinations with respect to the changes in the echocardiographic parameters were weak. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed poor improvement in GLS during ergometer-ESE, but not the change in MR, was associated with adverse events (p=0.0065). No echocardiographic change observed during handgrip-ESE was prognostic. After adjusting for a clinical risk score, GLS changes during ergometer-ESE remained significant in predicting the adverse events (HR 0.39, p=0.03) A subgroup analysis in patients with moderate or greater MR at baseline (n=27) showed the same results as in the entire cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: The physiological and prognostic implications of handgrip-ESE and ergometer-ESE findings significantly differ in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and secondary MR. The type of exercise to be performed in ESE should be carefully selected.
METHODS: Handgrip-ESE and symptom-limited ergometer-ESE were performed for 53 patients (median age (IQR): 68 (58-78) years; 70% male) on the same day. Baseline global longitudinal strain (GLS) was 9.2% (6.0%-14.0%) and MR volume was 20 (14-26) mL. All-cause death and cardiac hospitalisation were tracked for median 439 (101-507) days.
RESULTS: Handgrip-ESE induced slightly but significantly greater degrees of MR increase (median one grade increase; p<0.001) than ergometer-ESE, although the changes in other parameters, including GLS (+1.1% vs -0.6%, p<0.001), were significantly smaller. Correlations between the two examinations with respect to the changes in the echocardiographic parameters were weak. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed poor improvement in GLS during ergometer-ESE, but not the change in MR, was associated with adverse events (p=0.0065). No echocardiographic change observed during handgrip-ESE was prognostic. After adjusting for a clinical risk score, GLS changes during ergometer-ESE remained significant in predicting the adverse events (HR 0.39, p=0.03) A subgroup analysis in patients with moderate or greater MR at baseline (n=27) showed the same results as in the entire cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: The physiological and prognostic implications of handgrip-ESE and ergometer-ESE findings significantly differ in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and secondary MR. The type of exercise to be performed in ESE should be carefully selected.