Literature DB >> 23110656

Accuracy and precision of CPET equipment: a comparison of breath-by-breath and mixing chamber systems.

Casper Beijst1, Goof Schep, Eric van Breda, Pieter F F Wijn, Carola van Pul.   

Abstract

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) has become an important diagnostic tool for patients with cardiorespiratory disease and can monitor athletic performance measuring maximal oxygen uptake [Formula: see text]Vo2(; max). The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy and precision of a breath-by-breath and a mixing chamber CPET system, using two methods. First, this study developed a (theoretical) error analysis based on general error propagation theory. Second, calibration measurements using a metabolic simulator were performed. Error analysis shows that the error in oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]Vo2) and carbon dioxide production (Vco2[Formula: see text]) is smaller for mixing chamber than for breath-by-breath systems. In general, the error of the flow sensor [Formula: see text]δV, the error in temperature of expired air δT(B) and the delay time error δt(delay) are significant sources of error. Measurements using a metabolic simulator show that breath-by-breath systems are less stabile for different values of minute ventilation than mixing chamber systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23110656     DOI: 10.3109/03091902.2012.733057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Eng Technol        ISSN: 0309-1902


  10 in total

Review 1.  Partitional calorimetry.

Authors:  Matthew N Cramer; Ollie Jay
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2018-11-29

Review 2.  Open-circuit respirometry: a historical review of portable gas analysis systems.

Authors:  Duncan J Macfarlane
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 3.078

3.  The hemodynamic effects of a central iliac arteriovenous anastomosis at 6 months in patients with resistant and uncontrolled hypertension.

Authors:  William Eysenck; Jet van Zalen; Nick Freemantle; Guy Lloyd; Stephen Furniss; Neil Sulke
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 3.738

4.  Recovery Off-Kinetics Following Exhaustive Upper Body Exercise in Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Donal Murray; Lisa M K Chin; Rachel E Cowan; Suzanne L Groah; Randall E Keyser
Journal:  Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil       Date:  2021-01-20

5.  Could peak oxygen uptake be estimated from proposed equations based on the six-minute walk test in chronic heart failure subjects?

Authors:  Giane A Ribeiro-Samora; Dayane Montemezzo; Danielle A G Pereira; Thaysa L Tagliaferri; Otávia A Vieira; Raquel R Britto
Journal:  Braz J Phys Ther       Date:  2017-03-17       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Inflammation and oxidative stress in heart failure: effects of exercise intensity and duration.

Authors:  G A Ribeiro-Samora; L A Rabelo; A C C Ferreira; M Favero; G S Guedes; L S M Pereira; V F Parreira; R R Britto
Journal:  Braz J Med Biol Res       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 2.590

7.  ARTP statement on cardiopulmonary exercise testing 2021.

Authors:  Andrew Pritchard; Paul Burns; Joao Correia; Patrick Jamieson; Peter Moxon; Joanna Purvis; Maximillian Thomas; Hannah Tighe; Karl Peter Sylvester
Journal:  BMJ Open Respir Res       Date:  2021-11

8.  Validity, reliability and minimum detectable change of COSMED K5 portable gas exchange system in breath-by-breath mode.

Authors:  Laura Guidetti; Marco Meucci; Francesco Bolletta; Gian Pietro Emerenziani; Maria Chiara Gallotta; Carlo Baldari
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Inter- and intra-unit reliability of the COSMED K5: Implications for multicentric and longitudinal testing.

Authors:  Kay Winkert; Rupert Kamnig; Johannes Kirsten; Jürgen M Steinacker; Gunnar Treff
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Comparison of Two Metabolic Simulators Used for Gas Exchange Verification in Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test Carts.

Authors:  Tjeu Souren; Edward Rose; Herman Groepenhoff
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 4.566

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.