Sara Maldonado-Martín1, Peter H Brubaker, Cemal Ozemek, Jon A Jayo-Montoya, J Thomas Becton, Dalane W Kitzman. 1. Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Education and Sport-Physical Activity and Sport Sciences Section, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Vitoria-Gasteiz, Araba-Álava, Basque Country, Spain (Dr Maldonado-Martín and Mr Jayo-Montoya); Department of Health & Exercise Science, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina (Dr Brubaker); Department of Physical Therapy, University of Illinois, Chicago (Dr Ozemek); and Section on Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, North Carolina (Drs Becton and Kitzman).
Abstract
PURPOSE: The study aimed to investigate the differences in oxygen uptake ((Equation is included in full-text article.)O2) and heart rate (HR) (at rest, submaximal exercise, peak exercise, and recovery) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with β-blockers (BB) or without BB treatment (NBB) and to analyze the relationship between HR reserve (HRresv) and peak (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 ((Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak) in BB and NBB. METHODS: A total of 174 HFpEF patients (>65 yr; BB, n = 59; NBB, n = 115) were assessed with a cardiopulmonary exercise test to peak exertion using an incremental protocol. After 5 min of supine rest, HR and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 (HRrest, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2rest) at submaximal exercise (HRsubmax, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2submax), at peak exercise (HRpeak, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak), at 1 min of passive recovery (HRrec1), HRresv (HRpeak- HRrest), and HR recovery (HRrecov = HRpeak- HRrec1) were evaluated. RESULTS: Analysis showed that HRrest (66.0 ± 12.2 vs 69.7 ± 10.6 bpm), HRsubmax (91.7 ± 16.2 vs 98.6 ± 15.2 bpm), and HRrec1 (102.9 ± 18.9 vs 109.4 ± 16.9 bpm) were significantly lower (P ≤ .05) in BB than in NBB, respectively. However, there were no significant differences (P > .05) between the BB and the NBB for HRpeak, HRresv, HRrecov, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2rest, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2submax, and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak. A significant relationship was found between HRresv and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak values in both groups (BB, r = 0.52; NBB, r = 0.49, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The nonsignificant differences in HRpeak, HRresv, HRrecov, or (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 values between BB and NBB HFpEF patients, along with significant correlation between HRresv and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak, suggest that these measures may have equal utility in prognostic and functional assessment as well as clinical applications, including the prescription of exercise, in elderly HFpEF patients.
PURPOSE: The study aimed to investigate the differences in oxygen uptake ((Equation is included in full-text article.)O2) and heart rate (HR) (at rest, submaximal exercise, peak exercise, and recovery) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with β-blockers (BB) or without BB treatment (NBB) and to analyze the relationship between HR reserve (HRresv) and peak (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 ((Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak) in BB and NBB. METHODS: A total of 174 HFpEF patients (>65 yr; BB, n = 59; NBB, n = 115) were assessed with a cardiopulmonary exercise test to peak exertion using an incremental protocol. After 5 min of supine rest, HR and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 (HRrest, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2rest) at submaximal exercise (HRsubmax, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2submax), at peak exercise (HRpeak, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak), at 1 min of passive recovery (HRrec1), HRresv (HRpeak- HRrest), and HR recovery (HRrecov = HRpeak- HRrec1) were evaluated. RESULTS: Analysis showed that HRrest (66.0 ± 12.2 vs 69.7 ± 10.6 bpm), HRsubmax (91.7 ± 16.2 vs 98.6 ± 15.2 bpm), and HRrec1 (102.9 ± 18.9 vs 109.4 ± 16.9 bpm) were significantly lower (P ≤ .05) in BB than in NBB, respectively. However, there were no significant differences (P > .05) between the BB and the NBB for HRpeak, HRresv, HRrecov, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2rest, (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2submax, and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak. A significant relationship was found between HRresv and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak values in both groups (BB, r = 0.52; NBB, r = 0.49, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The nonsignificant differences in HRpeak, HRresv, HRrecov, or (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2 values between BB and NBB HFpEF patients, along with significant correlation between HRresv and (Equation is included in full-text article.)O2peak, suggest that these measures may have equal utility in prognostic and functional assessment as well as clinical applications, including the prescription of exercise, in elderly HFpEF patients.
Authors: Viviane M Conraads; Marco Metra; Otto Kamp; Gilles W De Keulenaer; Burkert Pieske; José Zamorano; Panos E Vardas; Michael Böhm; Livio Dei Cas Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2011-12-06 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Theophilus E Owan; David O Hodge; Regina M Herges; Steven J Jacobsen; Veronique L Roger; Margaret M Redfield Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-07-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Barry A Borlaug; Rick A Nishimura; Paul Sorajja; Carolyn S P Lam; Margaret M Redfield Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2010-06-11 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Ulrich P Jorde; Timothy J Vittorio; Michael E Kasper; Emma Arezzi; Paolo C Colombo; Rochelle L Goldsmith; Kartikya Ahuja; Chi-Hong Tseng; Francois Haas; David S Hirsh Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2007-12-21 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Kanan Patel; Gregg C Fonarow; O James Ekundayo; Inmaculada B Aban; Meredith L Kilgore; Thomas E Love; Dalane W Kitzman; Mihai Gheorghiade; Richard M Allman; Ali Ahmed Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2014-03-11 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Gema Ruiz; Jose L Andrey; Jose L Puerto; Miguel A Escobar; Sotero P Romero; Rocio Aranda; María J Pedrosa; Francisco Gomez Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2016-08-03 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Payman Zamani; Elizabeth A Proto; Neil Wilson; Hossein Fazelinia; Hua Ding; Lynn A Spruce; Antonio Davila; Thomas C Hanff; Jeremy A Mazurek; Stuart B Prenner; Benoit Desjardins; Kenneth B Margulies; Daniel P Kelly; Zoltan Arany; Paschalis-Thomas Doulias; John W Elrod; Mitchell E Allen; Shana E McCormack; Gayatri Maria Schur; Kevin D'Aquilla; Dushyant Kumar; Deepa Thakuri; Karthik Prabhakaran; Michael C Langham; David C Poole; Steven H Seeholzer; Ravinder Reddy; Harry Ischiropoulos; Julio A Chirinos Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2021-05-15
Authors: Eldar Priel; Mustafaa Wahab; Tapas Mondal; Andy Freitag; Paul M O'Byrne; Kieran J Killian; Imran Satia Journal: Curr Res Physiol Date: 2021-10-28