Impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation in patients with heart failure (ExTraMATCH II) on mortality and hospitalisation:an individual-patient data meta-analysis of randomised trials

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via the DOI in this recordAIMS: To undertake an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis to assess the impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (ExCR) in patients with heart failure (HF) on mortality and hospitalisation, and differential effects of ExCR according to patient characteristics: age, sex, ethnicity, New York Heart Association functional class, ischaemic aetiology, ejection fraction, and exercise capacity. METHODS AND RESULTS: Randomised trials of exercise training for at least 3 weeks compared with no exercise control with 6-month follow-up or longer, providing IPD time to event on mortality or hospitalisation (all-cause or HF-specific). IPD were combined into a single dataset. We used Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the effect of ExCR and the interactions between ExCR and participant characteristics. We used both two-stage random effects and one-stage fixed effect models. IPD were obtained from 18 trials including 3912 patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Compared to control, there was no statistically significant difference in pooled time to event estimates in favour of ExCR although confidence intervals (CIs) were wide [all-cause mortality: hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.67-1.04; HF-specific mortality: HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.49-1.46; all-cause hospitalisation: HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76-1.06; and HF-specific hospitalisation: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.72-1.35]. No strong evidence was found of differential intervention effects across patient characteristics. CONCLUSION: Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation did not have a significant effect on the risk of mortality and hospitalisation in HF with reduced ejection fraction. However, uncertainty around effect estimates precludes drawing definitive conclusions.This work is supported by UK National Institute for Health Research funding (HTA 15/80/30)

A relative value method for measuring and evaluating cardiac reserve

BACKGROUND: Although a very close relationship between the amplitude of the first heart sound (S1) and the cardiac contractility have been proven by previous studies, the absolute value of S1 can not be applied for evaluating cardiac contractility. However, we were able to devise some indicators with relative values for evaluating cardiac function. METHODS: Tests were carried out on a varied group of volunteers. Four indicators were devised: (1) the increase of the amplitude of the first heart sound after accomplishing different exercise workloads, with respect to the amplitude of the first heart sound (S1)recorded at rest was defined as cardiac contractility change trend (CCCT). When the subjects completed the entire designed exercise workload (7000 J), the resulting CCCT was defined as CCCT(1); when only 1/4 of the designed exercise workload was completed, the result was defined as CCCT(1/4). (2) The ratio of S1 amplitude to S2 amplitude (S1/S2). (3) The ratio of S1 amplitude at tricuspid valve auscultation area to that at mitral auscultation area T1/M1 (4) the ratio of diastolic to systolic duration (D/S). Data were expressed as mean ± SD. RESULTS: CCCT(1/4) was 6.36 ± 3.01 (n = 67), CCCT(1) was 10.36 ± 4.2 (n = 33), S1/S2 was1.89 ± 0.94 (n = 140), T1/M1 was 1.44 ± 0.99 (n = 144), and D/S was 1.68 ± 0.27 (n = 172). CONCLUSIONS: Using indicators CCCT(1/4) and CCCT(1) may be beneficial for evaluating cardiac contractility and cardiac reserve mobilization level, S1/S2 for considering the factor for hypotension, T1/M1 for evaluating the right heart load, and D/S for evaluating diastolic cardiac blood perfusion time

Acceptability, Feasibility and Preliminary Evaluation of a Novel, Personalised, Home based Physical Activity Intervention for Chronic Heart Failure (Active-at-Home-HF)::A Pilot Study

Purpose: Less than 10% of heart failure patients in the UK participate in cardiac rehabilitation programmes. The present pilot study evaluated feasibility, acceptability and physiological effects of a novel, personalised, home-based physical activity intervention in chronic heart failure. Methods: Twenty patients (68±7 years old, 20% females) with stable chronic heart failure due to reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (31±8 %) participated in a single group, pilot study assessing the feasibility and acceptability of a 12-week personalised home-based physical activity intervention aiming to increase daily number of steps by 2000 from baseline (Active-at-Home-HF). Patients completed cardiopulmonary exercise testing with non-invasive gas exchange and haemodynamic measurements and quality of life questionnaire pre- and post-intervention. Patients were supported weekly via telephone and average weekly step count data collected using pedometers. Results: 43 patients were screened and 20 recruited into the study. Seventeen patients (85%) completed the intervention, and 15 (75%) achieved the target step count. Average step count per day increased significantly from baseline to 3 weeks by 2546 (5108±3064 to 7654±3849 P=0.03, n=17), and was maintained until week 12 (9022±3942). Following completion of the intervention, no adverse events were recorded, quality of life improved by 4 points (26±18 vs. 22±19). Peak exercise stroke volume increased by 19% (127±34 vs 151±34 m/beat, P=0.05), while cardiac index increased by 12% (6.8±1.5 vs. 7.6±2.0 L/min/m2, P=0.19). Workload and oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold also increased by 16% (49±16 vs. 59±14 watts, P=0.01) and 10% (11.5±2.9 vs. 12.8±2.2 ml/kg/min, P=0.39). Conclusion: The Active-at-Home-HF intervention is feasible, acceptable and effective for increasing physical activity in CHF. It may lead to improvements in quality of life, exercise tolerance and haemodynamic function

Is Cardiorespiratory Fitness Related to Cardiometabolic Health and All-Cause Mortality Risk in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease? A CARE CR Study

Background: Higher cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) is associated with lower morbidity and mortality in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). The mechanisms for this are not fully understood. A more favourable cardiometabolic risk factor profile may be responsible, however few studies have comprehensively evaluated cardiometabolic risk factors in relation to CRF, among patients with CHD. Objective: To explore differences in cardiometabolic risk and 5-year all-cause mortality risk in patients with CHD who have low, moderate, and high levels of CRF. Methods: Patients with CHD underwent maximal cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), echocardiogram, carotid intima-media thickness measurement, spirometry, and dual X-ray absorptiometry assessment. Full blood count, biochemical lipid pro-files, high sensitivity (hs)- C-reactive protein and NT-proBNP were analysed. Pa-tients were defined as having low, moderate, or high CRF based on established prognostic thresholds. Results: 70 patients with CHD (age 63.1 ± 10.0 years, 86% male) were recruited. Patients with low CRF had a lower ventilatory anaerobic threshold, peak oxygen pulse, post-exercise heart rate recovery and poor ventilatory efficiency. The low CRF group also had higher NT pro-BNP, hs-CRP, non-fasting glucose concentrations and lower haemoglobin and haematocrit. Five-year mortality risk (CALIBER risk score) was also greatest in the lowest CRF group (14.9%). Conclusion: Practitioners should interpret low CRF as an important clinical risk factor associated with adverse cardiometabolic health and poor prognosis. Study registry; researchregistry.com (researchregistry3548). Key Words: Coronary Heart Disease, Cardiac Rehabilitation, Cardiometabolic Health, Exercise Training, Atherosclerosis, VO2peak, Maximal Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing, Caliber 5-year ris

Research into the Health Benefits of Sprint Interval Training Should Focus on Protocols with Fewer and Shorter Sprints

Over the past decade, it has been convincingly shown that regularly performing repeated brief supramaximal cycle sprints (sprint interval training [SIT]) is associated with aerobic adaptations and health benefits similar to or greater than with moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). SIT is often promoted as a time-efficient exercise strategy, but the most commonly studied SIT protocol (4–6 repeated 30-s Wingate sprints with 4 min recovery, here referred to as ‘classic’ SIT) takes up to approximately 30 min per session. Combined with high associated perceived exertion, this makes classic SIT unsuitable as an alternative/adjunct to current exercise recommendations involving MICT. However, there are no indications that the design of the classic SIT protocol has been based on considerations regarding the lowest number or shortest duration of sprints to optimise time efficiency while retaining the associated health benefits. In recent years, studies have shown that novel SIT protocols with both fewer and shorter sprints are efficacious at improving important risk factors of noncommunicable diseases in sedentary individuals, and provide health benefits that are no worse than those associated with classic SIT. These shorter/easier protocols have the potential to remove many of the common barriers to exercise in the general population. Thus, based on the evidence summarised in this current opinion paper, we propose that there is a need for a fundamental change in focus in SIT research in order to move away from further characterising the classic SIT protocol and towards establishing acceptable and effective protocols that involve minimal sprint durations and repetitions