Search

Comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a mainstay of the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. In the European Society of Cardiology guidelines, comprehensive cardiovascular rehabilitation has the highest class of recommendation and level of evidence as an effective method for the treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, after myocardial revascularization, with chronic coronary syndrome, for CVD prevention in clinical practice, and in patients with heart failure (HF). This document presents an expert opinion of the Cardiac Rehabilitation and Exercise Physiology Section of the Polish Cardiac Society concerning the definition, goals, target population, organization of rehabilitation services, standard clinical indications and methods of implementation. Moreover, it describes psychosocial risk factors influencing the course of CR and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients undergoing CR. Comprehensive CR is as a process that should be implemented as soon as possible, continued without interruption, and consist of multiple stages. Moreover, it should be tailored to the individual clinical situation and should be accepted by the patient and their family, friends, and caregivers.

IntroductionHybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) consisting of telecare (with psychological telesupport), telerehabilitation and remote monitoring of implantable devices might be an innovative option improving heart failure (HF) patients’ quality of life (QoL) and emotional health. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of HCTR on various facets of QoL in HF patients in comparison with usual care (UC) alone.Material and methodsThe present analysis formed part of a multicenter, randomized trial that enrolled 850 HF patients (NYHA I–III, LVEF ≤ 40%). Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to HCTR plus UC or UC only. Patients underwent either an HCTR program or UC with observation. The psychological intervention in the HCTR group included supportive psychological counseling via mobile phone. The Medical Outcome Survey Short Form 36 Questionnaire was used to assess QoL. Measurements were made before and after a 9-week intervention (HCTR group)/observation (UC group).ResultsAfter the intervention, the HCTR group showed significant improvement in overall QoL, physical domain (PD) of QoL, and 4 areas of QoL (physical functioning (PhF), role functioning related to physical state (RF), general health (GH), vitality (VI)). A significant positive change in QoL in the UC group was observed only in VI and social functioning. There were also significant differences in QoL after 9-week intervention/observation between the two groups. The results showed greater improvement in HCTR for overall QoL (p = 0.009), PD of QoL (p = 0.0003) and three specific areas of QoL: PhF (p = 0.001), RF (p = 0.003), bodily pain (BP) (p = 0.015).ConclusionsIn comparison to UC, HCTR resulted in improvement in overall QoL, PD of QoL and 3 specific areas of QoL: PhF, RF and BP.

IMPORTANCE: Guidelines recommend exercise training as a component of heart failure management. There are large disparities in access to rehabilitation, and introducing hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) consisting of remote monitoring of training at patients’ homes might be an appealing alternative. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether potential improvements in quality-of-life outcomes after a 9-week HCTR intervention in patients with heart failure translate into improvement in clinical outcomes during extended 12 to 24 months of follow-up, compared with usual care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Telerehabilitation in Heart Failure Patients (TELEREH-HF) trial is a multicenter, prospective, open-label, parallel-group randomized clinical trial that enrolled 850 patients with heart failure up to 6 months after a cardiovascular hospitalization with New York Heart Association levels I, II, or III and left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less. Patients from 5 centers in Poland were randomized 1:1 to HCTR plus usual care or usual care only and followed up for 14 to 26 months after randomization. INTERVENTIONS: During the first 9 weeks, patients underwent either an HCTR program (1 week in hospital and 8 weeks at home) or usual care with observation. The HCTR intervention encompassed telecare, telerehabilitation, and remote monitoring of implantable devices. No intervention occurred in the remaining study period. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The percentage of days alive and out of the hospital from randomization through the end of follow-up at 14 to 26 months. RESULTS: A total of 850 patients were enrolled, with 425 randomized to the HCTR group (377 male patients [88.7%]; mean [SD] age, 62.6 [10.8] years) and 425 randomized to usual care (376 male patients [88.5%]; mean [SD] age, 62.2 [10.2] years). The HCTR intervention did not extend the percentage of days alive and out of the hospital. The mean (SD) days were 91.9 (19.3) days in the HCTR group vs 92.8 (18.3) days in the usual-care group, with the probability that HCTR extends days alive and out of the hospital equal to 0.49 (95% CI, 0.46-0.53; P = .74) vs usual care. During follow-up, 54 patients died in the HCTR arm and 52 in the usual-care arm, with mortality rates at 26 months of 12.5% vs 12.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.70-1.51]). There were also no differences in hospitalization rates (hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.79-1.13]). The HCTR intervention was effective at 9 weeks, significantly improving peak oxygen consumption (0.95 [95% CI, 0.65-1.26] mL/kg/min vs 0.00 [95% CI, −0.31 to 0.30] mL/kg/min; P

Introduction: Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are at risk of strokes and neurocognitive disorders. The aim of the study was to assess the clinical utility of susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) MRI in detection of new brain lesions in patients after CABG. We assessed the incidence and types of brain lesions and correlated the data with neurological examinations in groups of patients who underwent on-pump and off-pump CABG. Material and methods: Patients underwent a neurological examination and MRI before, 6-20 days after and 6 months after the CABG. Fifty-one patients (43 men, mean age 63.12 years) were analyzed. Results: Fifteen (29.4%) patients underwent on-pump CABG, 36 (70.6%) off-pump CABG. On postoperative scans new lesions were detected in 12 (23.5%) patients. Ischemic lesions (visible on diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI]) were detected in 4 patients, in 6 lesions were visible on SWI, in 1 case lesions were visible on SWI and DWI. Hemorrhagic stroke was observed in 1 patient. In the group of patients who underwent on-pump CABG, new brain lesions were observed in 60.0% of patients vs. 8.3% of those who underwent off-pump CABG (p < 0.0001); these changes more frequently were multiple (p < 0.0013) and located infratentorially (p < 0.0218). Lesions visible on SWI were observed only in patients undergoing onpump CABG (p = 0.00005). In all patients (except for 1 with stroke), lesions visible in MRI were clinically silent.

BACKGROUND Replacement of severely stenotic aortic valve may influence cognitive and physical functioning. The aim of this study was to compare cognitive and functional status after surgical (SAVR) vs. transcatheter aortic valve replacements (TAVR) in the elderly with severe aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS It was a prospective observational study with over 6 months of follow-up. Eighty ≥70-year-old patients with AS underwent TAVR (N.=40) or SAVR (N.=40). Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE), activities daily living (ADL) score and instrumental activities daily living (IADL) score were used to assess the cognitive status, fundamental functioning and complex independent living skills, respectively. The tests were conducted at baseline and 6 months after the procedure. Additionally, MMSE was carried out at discharge. RESULTS Baseline MMSE score was lower in the TAVR vs. SAVR group (P=0.001). In the SAVR group, there was a transient in-hospital decline in mean MMSE score (P=0.020), absent in the TAVR group. Baseline ADL and IADL scores were lower in TAVR patients. Both groups experienced mild improvement. The average increase among those with improved IADL score was larger after TAVR (2.37 vs. 1.37 after SAVR; P=0.029). A systolic blood pressure (SBP) decrease