Exercise training program in patients with NYHA III class systolic heart failure - Parallel comparison to the effects of resynchronization therapy

Cardiac Rehabilitation and Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: Pathophysiology, Benefits, and Precautions

Heart failure (HF) is a highly comorbid condition associated with significant mortality, despite advances in current medical management. Patients who suffer from HF represent a high needs disease care population in whom structured, long-term chronic disease care delivery models, such as cardiac rehabilitation (CR), have been shown to be highly cost effective in reducing hospitalizations and improving quality of life. HF with reduced ejection fraction affects a growing number of Canadians and health care costs secondary to this condition are increasing, with further increases over the next decade to be expected. CR is a guideline-directed medical therapy for patients living with HF with reduced ejection fraction, and with increasing numbers of HF patients across the world, there is a prescient need to revisit the benefits, safety, and the prescription of this intervention for the health care professionals who treat this condition. Certainly, there is a clinical need for HF practitioners to better understand the pathophysiological benefits of CR with respect to exercise training, as well as the prudent precautions required to facilitate the safe delivery of this highly cost-effective patient intervention.

Ergophysiological evaluation of heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction undergoing exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to explore in heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF) undergoing exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation the following: 1) the comparison of temporal changes between peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) and first ventilatory threshold (VO2VT1), 2) the association of VO2peak and VO2VT1 changes with physiological factors, and 3) the differential effects of continuous aerobic exercise (CAE) and interval training (IT) on VO2peak and VO2VT1.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, CENTRAL, and Scopus. Inclusion criteria were 1) original research articles using exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation, 2) stable HF patients with reduced EF, 3) available values of VO2peak and VO2VT1 (in mL/kg/min) both at baseline and after exercise training with comparison between these time points.

RESULTS

Among the 30 eligible trials, 24 used CAE, 5 IT, and one CAE and IT. Multivariable meta-regression with duration of exercise training and percentage of males as independent variables and the change in VO2peak as a dependent variable showed that the change in VO2peak was negatively associated with duration of exercise training (coefficient=-0.061, p=0.027), implying the possible existence of a waning effect of exercise training on VO2peak in the long term. Multivariable meta-regression demonstrated that both age (coefficient=-0.140, p<0.001) and EF (coefficient=-0.149, p<0.001) could predict the change in VO2VT1, whereas only age (coefficient=-0.095, p=0.022), but not EF (coefficient = 0.082, p = 0.100), could predict the change in VO2peak. The posttraining peak respiratory exchange ratio, as an index of maximum effort during exercise testing, correlated positively with the change in VO2peak (coefficient=-0.021, p=0.044). The exercise-induced changes of VO2peak (p = 0.438) and VO2VT1 (p = 0.474) did not differ between CAE and IT groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement of endurance capacity during cardiac rehabilitation may be detected more accurately with the assessment of VO2VT1 rather than VO2peak.

Patient-Reported Quality of Life, Depression, Anxiety, and Physical Activity in Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Primary versus Secondary Prevention: A Single-Centre, Prospective, Observational Cohort Study

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to evaluate of the quality of life, depression, anxiety levels, and physical activity in the groups after the implantation of an ICD or CRT-D.

METHODS

All subjects (111 CHF patients) underwent tests to assess the quality of life (NHP), the level of physical activity (IPAQ), the level of perceived stress (PSS), and the incidence of depression (BDI).

RESULTS

After the implantation, physical activity (PA) of the patients from the primary prevention (PP) group remains unchanged, whereas in the secondary prevention (SP) group, it decreases noticeably. Physical activity is lower in the SP group in comparison with the PP group. There are no statistically significant differences in the level of depression. The scores in the second part of the NHP questionnaire indicate that the SP group significantly more often declare problems with housework and with social life than the PP group.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The type of prevention does not have an influence on the level of anxiety, stress, or depression. 2. The patients after implantation as SP are physically less active; lower PA is associated additionally with the higher NYHA class and chronic kidney disease. 3. The quality of life of the patients from SP group is at a lower level than patients from PP group.

Heinzel F, Davos CH, Kudaiberdieva G, Frederix I, Svendsen JH, Hansen D. Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.

Comprehensive multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients: a consensus document from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC; Secondary prevention and rehabilitation section) and European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary intervention including patient assessment and medical actions to promote stabilization, management of cardiovascular risk factors, vocational support, psychosocial management, physical activity counselling, and prescription of exercise training. Millions of people with cardiac implantable electronic devices live in Europe and their numbers are progressively increasing, therefore, large subsets of patients admitted in CR facilities have a cardiac implantable electronic device. Patients who are cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients are considered eligible for a CR programme. This is not only related to the underlying heart disease but also to specific issues, such as psychological adaptation to living with an implanted device and, in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients, the risk of arrhythmia, syncope, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, these patients should receive special attention, as their needs may differ from other patients participating in CR. As evidence from studies of CR in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices is sparse, detailed clinical practice guidelines are lacking. Here, we aim to provide practical recommendations for CR in cardiac implantable electronic devices recipients in order to increase CR implementation, efficacy, and safety in this subset of patients.