Stefania Farina1, Noemi Bruno1, Cecilia Agalbato1, Mauro Contini1, Roberto Cassandro2, Davide Elia2, Sergio Harari2, Piergiuseppe Agostoni3. 1. Cardiology Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Milan, Italy. 2. Unit of Pneumology and Respiratory Semi - Intensive Care Unit, Respiratory Pathophysiology and Pulmonary Hemodynamics Service, San Giuseppe Hospital, Multimedica IRCCS, Milan, Italy. 3. Cardiology Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Cardiovascular Section University of Milan, Milan, Italy. Electronic address: piergiuseppe.agostoni@ccfm.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients show, during exercise, an excessive increase in ventilation (VE) compared to carbon dioxide output (VCO2), determining a high VE/VCO2 slope. There are several possible causes, including an elevated dead space ventilation (VD), VE/perfusion (Q) mismatch and/or an enhanced peripheral or central chemoreceptor activity. We evaluated the causes of exercise hyperventilation in PH patients. METHODS: Eighteen group I and IV PH patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise test with blood gas analysis at every minute. VE, alveolar ventilation (VA) and VD vs. VCO2 relationship were calculated. Resting chemoreceptor sensitivity was analyzed through hypoxia/hypercapnia tests. RESULTS: PeakVO2 and VE/VCO2 slopes were 1.06±0.24l/min and 39.1±9.0, respectively. Throughout the exercise, 30% of VE was due to VD. VE/VCO2 slope significantly correlated with VD/VCO2 slope (r=0.82, p<0.001) but not with VA/VCO2 slope (r=0.3, p=ns). Peak exercise end-tidal CO2 (PetCO2) correlated with VD/VCO2 slope (r=-0.79, p<0.001) and VE/VCO2 slope (r=-0.91, p<0.001). Dead space(DS)/Tidal volume and P(arterial-et)CO2 were elevated without arterial hypoxemia suggesting a high VE/Q mismatch. Chemoreceptor peripheral response to hypoxia and central CO2 response were both enhanced being peripheral responses to hypoxia and hypercapnia 0.416±0.402 (normal ref values=0.285±0.221) l/min/O2Sat and 0.076±0.047 (0.066±0.430) l/min/mmHg, respectively; central hypercapnic chemosensitivity was 4.475±3.99 (2.352±0.936) l/min/mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Increased DS, VE/Q mismatch and chemorecptor response are among the main mechanisms involved in exercise hyperventilation in PH. ClinicalTrial.govNCT02892981.
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients show, during exercise, an excessive increase in ventilation (VE) compared to carbon dioxide output (VCO2), determining a high VE/VCO2 slope. There are several possible causes, including an elevated dead space ventilation (VD), VE/perfusion (Q) mismatch and/or an enhanced peripheral or central chemoreceptor activity. We evaluated the causes of exercise hyperventilation in PH patients. METHODS: Eighteen group I and IV PH patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise test with blood gas analysis at every minute. VE, alveolar ventilation (VA) and VD vs. VCO2 relationship were calculated. Resting chemoreceptor sensitivity was analyzed through hypoxia/hypercapnia tests. RESULTS: PeakVO2 and VE/VCO2 slopes were 1.06±0.24l/min and 39.1±9.0, respectively. Throughout the exercise, 30% of VE was due to VD. VE/VCO2 slope significantly correlated with VD/VCO2 slope (r=0.82, p<0.001) but not with VA/VCO2 slope (r=0.3, p=ns). Peak exercise end-tidal CO2 (PetCO2) correlated with VD/VCO2 slope (r=-0.79, p<0.001) and VE/VCO2 slope (r=-0.91, p<0.001). Dead space(DS)/Tidal volume and P(arterial-et)CO2 were elevated without arterial hypoxemia suggesting a high VE/Q mismatch. Chemoreceptor peripheral response to hypoxia and central CO2 response were both enhanced being peripheral responses to hypoxia and hypercapnia 0.416±0.402 (normal ref values=0.285±0.221) l/min/O2Sat and 0.076±0.047 (0.066±0.430) l/min/mmHg, respectively; central hypercapnic chemosensitivity was 4.475±3.99 (2.352±0.936) l/min/mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Increased DS, VE/Q mismatch and chemorecptor response are among the main mechanisms involved in exercise hyperventilation in PH. ClinicalTrial.govNCT02892981.
Authors: Marcelle Paula-Ribeiro; Indyanara C Ribeiro; Liliane C Aranda; Talita M Silva; Camila M Costa; Roberta P Ramos; Jaquelina S Ota-Arakaki; Sergio L Cravo; Luiz E Nery; Michael K Stickland; Bruno M Silva Journal: J Physiol Date: 2019-01-30 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Xiaodan Zhao; Liwei Hu; Shuang Leng; Ru-San Tan; Ping Chai; Jennifer Ann Bryant; Lynette L S Teo; Marielle V Fortier; Tee Joo Yeo; Rong Zhen Ouyang; John C Allen; Marina Hughes; Pankaj Garg; Shuo Zhang; Rob J van der Geest; James W Yip; Teng Hong Tan; Ju Le Tan; Yumin Zhong; Liang Zhong Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Eva L Peters; Jasmijn S J A van Campen; Herman Groepenhoff; Frances S de Man; Anton Vonk Noordegraaf; Harm J Bogaard Journal: Pulm Circ Date: 2021-12-13 Impact factor: 3.017
Authors: B Pezzuto; R Badagliacca; M Muratori; S Farina; M Bussotti; M Correale; A Bonomi; C Vignati; S Sciomer; S Papa; E Palazzo Adriano; P Agostoni Journal: Pulm Circ Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 2.886