Search

Abstract Aims Although cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is the gold standard to assess exercise capacity, simpler tests (i.e., 6‐min walk test, 6MWT) are also commonly used. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between cardiorespiratory parameters during CPET and 6MWT in a large, multicentre, heterogeneous population. Methods We included athletes, healthy subjects, and heart failure (HF) patients of different severity, including left ventricular assist device (LVAD) carriers, who underwent both CPET and 6MWT with oxygen consumption measurement. Results We enrolled 186 subjects (16 athletes, 40 healthy, 115 non‐LVAD HF patients, and 15 LVAD carriers). CPET‐peakV̇O2 was 41.0 [35.0–45.8], 26.2 [23.1–31.0], 12.8 [11.1–15.3], and 15.2 [13.6–15.6] ml/Kg/min in athletes, healthy, HF patients, and LVAD carriers, respectively (P

Abstract Aims In heart failure (HF), anaerobic threshold (AT) may be indeterminable but its value held a relevant prognostic role. AT is evaluated joining three methods: V‐slope, ventilatory equivalent, and end‐tidal methods. The possible non‐concordance between the V‐slope (met AT) and the other two methods (vent AT) has been highlighted in healthy individuals and named double threshold (DT). Methods and results We reanalysed 1075 cardiopulmonary exercise tests of HF patients recruited in the Metabolic Exercise test data combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) score database. We identified DT in 43% of cases. Met AT precedes vent AT being met–ventΔVO2 221 (interquartile range: 129–319) mL/min. Peak VO2, 1307 ± 485 vs. 1343 ± 446 mL/min (63 ± 17 vs. 63 ± 17 percentage of predicted), was similar between DT+ and DT− patients. Differently, DT+ showed a lower ventilatory vs. carbon dioxide production (VE/VCO2) slope (29.6 ± 6.1 vs. 31.0 ± 6.3), a lower peak exercise end‐tidal oxygen tension (PetO2) 115.3 (111.5–118.9) vs. 116.4 (112.4–120.2) mmHg, and a higher carbon dioxide tension (PetCO2) 34.2 (30.9–37.1) vs. 32.4 (28.7–35.5) mmHg. Vent AT showed a significant higher VO2, 957 ± 318 vs. 719 ± 252 mL/min, VCO2, 939 ± 319 vs. 627 ± 226 mL/min, ventilation, 31.0 ± 8.3 vs. 22.5 ± 6.3 L/min, respiratory exchange ratio, 0.98 ± 0.08 vs. 0.87 ± 0.07, PetO2, 108 (104–112) vs. 105 (101–109) mmHg, PetCO2, 37 (34–40) vs. 36 (33–39) mmHg, and VE/VO2 ratio, 33.5 ± 6.7 vs. 32.6 ± 6.9, but lower VE/VCO2 ratio, 33 (30–37) vs. 36 (32–41), compared with met AT. At 2 year survival by Kaplan–Meier analysis, even adjusted for confounders, DT resulted not associated with survival. Conclusions Double threshold is frequently observed in HF patients. DT+ is associated to a decreased ventilatory response during exercise.

Abstract Aims Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) and 6 min walking test (6MWT) are frequently used in heart failure (HF). CPET is a maximal exercise, whereas 6MWT is a self‐selected constant load test usually considered a submaximal, and therefore safer, exercise, but this has not been tested previously. The aim of this study was to compare the cardiorespiratory parameters collected during CPET and 6MWT in a large group of healthy subjects and patients with HF of different severity. Methods and results Subjects performed a standard maximal CPET and a 6MWT wearing a portable device allowing breath‐by‐breath measurement of cardiorespiratory parameters. HF patients were grouped according to their CPET peak oxygen uptake (peakV̇O2). One hundred and fifty‐five subjects were enrolled, of whom 40 were healthy (59 ± 8 years; male 67%) and 115 were HF patients (69 ± 10 years; male 80%; left ventricular ejection fraction 34.6 ± 12.0%). CPET peakV̇O2 was 13.5 ± 3.5 mL/kg/min in HF patients and 28.1 ± 7.4 mL/kg/min in healthy subjects (P 110% of CPET peakV̇O2 in 42% of more severe HF patients (peakV̇O2

Abstract Aims We assessed the outcome of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients with heart failure (HF) compared with patients with other cardiovascular disease and/or risk factors (arterial hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidaemia). We further wanted to determine the incidence of HF events and its consequences in these patient populations. Methods and results International retrospective Postgraduate Course in Heart Failure registry for patients hospitalized with COVID‐19 and CArdioVascular disease and/or risk factors (arterial hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidaemia) was performed in 28 centres from 15 countries (PCHF‐COVICAV). The primary endpoint was in‐hospital mortality. Of 1974 patients hospitalized with COVID‐19, 1282 had cardiovascular disease and/or risk factors (median age: 72 [interquartile range: 62–81] years, 58% male), with HF being present in 256 [20%] patients. Overall in‐hospital mortality was 25% (n = 323/1282 deaths). In‐hospital mortality was higher in patients with a history of HF (36%, n = 92) compared with non‐HF patients (23%, n = 231, odds ratio [OR] 1.93 [95% confidence interval: 1.44–2.59], P