Hayley T Dillon1,2, Christophe Dausin3, Guido Claessen1,4, Anniina Lindqvist1, Amy Mitchell1, Leah Wright1, Rik Willems4, André La Gerche1,5, Erin J Howden6. 1. Sports Cardiology Laboratory, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. 2. Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia. 3. Exercise Physiology Research Group, Department of Movement Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 5. National Centre for Sports Cardiology, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, Australia. 6. Sports Cardiology Laboratory, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. erin.howden@baker.edu.au.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Semi-supine and supine cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) with concurrent cardiac imaging has emerged as a valuable tool for evaluating patients with cardiovascular disease. Yet, it is unclear how posture effects CPET measures. We aimed to discern the effect of posture on maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) and its determinants using three clinically relevant cycle ergometers. METHODS: In random order, 10 healthy, active males (Age 27 ± 7 years; BMI 23 ± 2 kg m2) underwent a ramp CPET and subsequent constant workload verification test performed at 105% peak ramp power to quantify VO2max on upright, semi-supine and supine cycle ergometers. Doppler echocardiography was conducted at peak exercise to measure stroke volume (SV) which was multiplied by heart rate (HR) to calculate cardiac output (CO). RESULTS: Compared to upright (46.8 ± 11.2 ml/kg/min), VO2max was progressively reduced in semi-supine (43.8 ± 10.6 ml/kg/min) and supine (38.2 ± 9.3 ml/kg/min; upright vs. semi-supine vs. supine; all p ≤ 0.005). Similarly, peak power was highest in upright (325 ± 80 W), followed by semi-supine (298 ± 72 W) and supine (200 ± 51 W; upright vs. semi-supine vs. supine; all p < 0.01). Peak HR decreased progressively from upright to semi-supine to supine (186 ± 11 vs. 176 ± 13 vs. 169 ± 12 bpm; all p < 0.05). Peak SV and CO were lower in supine relative to semi-supine and upright (82 ± 22 vs. 92 ± 26 vs. 91 ± 24 ml and 14 ± 3 vs. 16 ± 4 vs. 17 ± 4 l/min; all p < 0.01), but not different between semi-supine and upright. CONCLUSION: VO2max is progressively reduced in reclined postures. Thus, posture should be considered when comparing VO2max results between different testing modalities.
PURPOSE: Semi-supine and supine cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) with concurrent cardiac imaging has emerged as a valuable tool for evaluating patients with cardiovascular disease. Yet, it is unclear how posture effects CPET measures. We aimed to discern the effect of posture on maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) and its determinants using three clinically relevant cycle ergometers. METHODS: In random order, 10 healthy, active males (Age 27 ± 7 years; BMI 23 ± 2 kg m2) underwent a ramp CPET and subsequent constant workload verification test performed at 105% peak ramp power to quantify VO2max on upright, semi-supine and supine cycle ergometers. Doppler echocardiography was conducted at peak exercise to measure stroke volume (SV) which was multiplied by heart rate (HR) to calculate cardiac output (CO). RESULTS: Compared to upright (46.8 ± 11.2 ml/kg/min), VO2max was progressively reduced in semi-supine (43.8 ± 10.6 ml/kg/min) and supine (38.2 ± 9.3 ml/kg/min; upright vs. semi-supine vs. supine; all p ≤ 0.005). Similarly, peak power was highest in upright (325 ± 80 W), followed by semi-supine (298 ± 72 W) and supine (200 ± 51 W; upright vs. semi-supine vs. supine; all p < 0.01). Peak HR decreased progressively from upright to semi-supine to supine (186 ± 11 vs. 176 ± 13 vs. 169 ± 12 bpm; all p < 0.05). Peak SV and CO were lower in supine relative to semi-supine and upright (82 ± 22 vs. 92 ± 26 vs. 91 ± 24 ml and 14 ± 3 vs. 16 ± 4 vs. 17 ± 4 l/min; all p < 0.01), but not different between semi-supine and upright. CONCLUSION: VO2max is progressively reduced in reclined postures. Thus, posture should be considered when comparing VO2max results between different testing modalities.
Authors: Calvin W L Chin; Hwan J Khaw; Elton Luo; Shuwei Tan; Audrey C White; David E Newby; Marc R Dweck Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2014-04-25 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Damir Zubac; Vladimir Ivančev; Vincent Martin; Antonio Dello Iacono; Cécil J W Meulenberg; Adam C McDonnell Journal: PeerJ Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 3.061
Authors: Hayley T Dillon; Nicholas J Saner; Tegan Ilsley; David Kliman; Andrew Spencer; Sharon Avery; David W Dunstan; Robin M Daly; Steve F Fraser; Neville Owen; Brigid M Lynch; Bronwyn A Kingwell; Andre La Gerche; Erin J Howden Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 4.638