Short-Term Effects of Normocapnic Hyperpnea and Exercise Training in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Pilot Study

Impact of high-intensity interval hyperpnea on aerobic energy release and inspiratory muscle fatigue

Respiratory muscle endurance training reportedly has beneficial effects on whole-body endurance performance. We produced a novel high-intensity interval (HII) protocol and characterized the associated physiological responses and respiratory muscle fatigue. Peak oxygen uptake of respiratory muscle (V̇O2peakRM) was estimated during the respiratory incremental test. The HII session consisted of five 3-minute hyperpnea periods at 100%V̇O2peakRM interspersed with 2-minute periods at 40%V̇O2peakRM (25 min total). The high-intensity continuous (HIC) session involved a single time-to-end bout of hyperpnea at 100%V̇O2peakRM. The moderate-intensity continuous (MIC) session involved 25 min of hyperpnea at 60% of maximal voluntary ventilation. V̇O2RM was recorded continuously, and maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax) was assessed before and after the sessions. HII session: V̇O2RM gradually increased as the sets proceeded, whereas PImax decreased significantly. HIC session: V̇O2RM increased progressively, and the time to end was 6.5 ± 0.5 min. PImax decreased significantly. MIC session: V̇O2RM did not change for 25 min, and PImax remained unchanged. The duration of V̇O2RM at near- and supra-maximal levels in the HII session (10 ± 1 min) was longer than that in the HIC session (4 ± 1 min). The decrease in PImax was larger in the HII session (-12 ± 3 %) than MIC session (-4 ± 3 %). The HII protocol is characterized by a longer time to maximally stimulate the aerobic energy system of respiratory muscle than the HIC protocol and greater inspiratory muscle fatigue than the traditional MIC protocol. These results suggest that the HII protocol could enhance the efficacy of respiratory muscle training programs.

Inspiratory muscle training, with or without concomitant pulmonary rehabilitation, for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

BACKGROUND

Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) aims to improve respiratory muscle strength and endurance. Clinical trials used various training protocols, devices and respiratory measurements to check the effectiveness of this intervention. The current guidelines reported a possible advantage of IMT, particularly in people with respiratory muscle weakness. However, it remains unclear to what extent IMT is clinically beneficial, especially when associated with pulmonary rehabilitation (PR).   OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as a stand-alone intervention and when combined with pulmonary rehabilitation (PR).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) EBSCO, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 20 October 2021. We also checked reference lists of all primary studies and review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IMT in combination with PR versus PR alone and IMT versus control/sham. We included different types of IMT irrespective of the mode of delivery. We excluded trials that used resistive devices without controlling the breathing pattern or a training load of less than 30% of maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax), or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane including assessment of risk of bias with RoB 2. Our primary outcomes were dyspnea, functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 55 RCTs in this review. Both IMT and PR protocols varied significantly across the trials, especially in training duration, loads, devices, number/ frequency of sessions and the PR programs. Only eight trials were at low risk of bias. PR+IMT versus PR We included 22 trials (1446 participants) in this comparison. Based on a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of -1 unit, we did not find an improvement in dyspnea assessed with the Borg scale at submaximal exercise capacity (mean difference (MD) 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.42 to 0.79; 2 RCTs, 202 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).   We also found no improvement in dyspnea assessed with themodified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (mMRC) according to an MCID between -0.5 and -1 unit (MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.14; 2 RCTs, 204 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Pooling evidence for the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) showed an increase of 5.95 meters (95% CI -5.73 to 17.63; 12 RCTs, 1199 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and failed to reach the MCID of 26 meters. In subgroup analysis, we divided the RCTs according to the training duration and mean baseline PImax. The test for subgroup differences was not significant. Trials at low risk of bias (n = 3) demonstrated a larger effect estimate than the overall. The summary effect of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) revealed an overall total score below the MCID of 4 units (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.93 to 1.20; 7 RCTs, 908 participants; low-certainty evidence).  The summary effect of COPD Assessment Test (CAT) did not show an improvement in the HRQoL (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.80 to 1.06; 2 RCTs, 657 participants; very low-certainty evidence), according to an MCID of -1.6 units.  Pooling the RCTs that reported PImax showed an increase of 11.46 cmH₂O (95% CI 7.42 to 15.50; 17 RCTs, 1329 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) but failed to reach the MCID of 17.2 cmH₂O.  In subgroup analysis, we did not find a difference between different training durations and between studies judged with and without respiratory muscle weakness.  One abstract reported some adverse effects that were considered "minor and self-limited". IMT versus control/sham Thirty-seven RCTs with 1021 participants contributed to our second comparison. There was a trend towards an improvement when Borg was calculated at submaximal exercise capacity (MD -0.94, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.51; 6 RCTs, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Only one trial was at a low risk of bias. Eight studies (nine arms) used the Baseline Dyspnea Index - Transition Dyspnea Index (BDI-TDI). Based on an MCID of +1 unit, they showed an improvement only with the 'total score' of the TDI (MD 2.98, 95% CI 2.07 to 3.89; 8 RCTs, 238 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not find a difference between studies classified as with and without respiratory muscle weakness. Only one trial was at low risk of bias. Four studies reported the mMRC, revealing a possible improvement in dyspnea in the IMT group (MD -0.59, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.43; 4 RCTs, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence). Two trials were at low risk of bias. Compared to control/sham, the MD in the 6MWD following IMT was 35.71 (95% CI 25.68 to 45.74; 16 RCTs, 501 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Two studies were at low risk of bias. In subgroup analysis, we did not find a difference between different training durations and between studies judged with and without respiratory muscle weakness.  Six studies reported theSGRQ total score, showing a larger effect in the IMT group (MD -3.85, 95% CI -8.18 to 0.48; 6 RCTs, 182 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The lower limit of the 95% CI exceeded the MCID of -4 units. Only one study was at low risk of bias. There was an improvement in life quality with CAT (MD -2.97, 95% CI -3.85 to -2.10; 2 RCTs, 86 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial was at low risk of bias. Thirty-two RCTs reported PImax, showing an improvement without reaching the MCID (MD 14.57 cmH₂O, 95% CI 9.85 to 19.29; 32 RCTs, 916 participants; low-certainty evidence). In subgroup analysis, we did not find a difference between different training durations and between studies judged with and without respiratory muscle weakness.   None of the included RCTs reported adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

IMT may not improve dyspnea, functional exercise capacity and life quality when associated with PR. However, IMT is likely to improve these outcomes when provided alone. For both interventions, a larger effect in participants with respiratory muscle weakness and with longer training durations is still to be confirmed.

Acute Cardiopulmonary and Muscle Oxygenation Responses to Normocapnic Hyperpnea Exercise in COPD

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate cardiorespiratory responses and intercostal muscle oxygenation during normocapnic hyperpnea exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

Twenty-two patients with COPD performed a cardiopulmonary cycling exercise test to assess peak oxygen consumption (V˙O2peak) and minute ventilation (V˙Epeak). They also performed a normocapnic hyperpnea exercise alone, at 50%-60% of V˙Epeak to exhaustion, using a respiratory device (Spirotiger) connected to a gas analyzer to monitor V˙O2, V˙E, and end-tidal CO2 partial pressure. Cardiac output, and intercostal and vastus lateralis muscle oxygenation were continuously measured during exercise using finger photoplethysmography and near-infrared spectroscopy, respectively. Arterial blood gases (arterial PCO2) and inspiratory capacity were obtained at rest and at the end of hyperpnea exercise.

RESULTS

The hyperpnea exercise lasted 576 ± 277 s at a V˙E of 34.5 ± 12.1 L·min-1 (58% ± 6% of V˙Epeak), a respiratory rate of 22 ± 4 breaths per minute, and a tidal volume of 1.43 ± 0.43 L. From rest to the end of hyperpnea exercise, V˙O2 increased by 0.35 ± 0.16 L·min-1 (P < 0.001), whereas end-tidal CO2 partial pressure and arterial PCO2 decreased by ~2 mm Hg (P = 0.031) and ~5 mm Hg (P = 0.002, n = 13), respectively. Moreover, inspiratory capacity fell from 2.44 ± 0.84 L at rest to 1.96 ± 0.59 L (P = 0.002). During the same period, heart rate and cardiac output increased from 69 ± 12 bpm and 4.94 ± 1.15 L·min-1 at rest to 87 ± 17 bpm (P = 0.002) and 5.92 ± 1.58 L·min-1 (P = 0.007), respectively. During hyperpnea exercise, intercostal deoxyhemoglobin and total hemoglobin increased by 14.26% ± 13.72% (P = 0.001) and 8.69% ± 12.49% (P = 0.003) compared with their resting value. However, during the same period, vastus lateralis oxygenation remained stable (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with COPD, normocapnic hyperpnea exercise provided a potent cardiorespiratory physiological stimulus, including dynamic hyperinflation, and increased intercostal deoxyhemoglobin consistent with enhanced requirement for muscle O2 extraction.

Effects of respiratory rehabilitation on patients with novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia in the rehabilitation phase: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The recent viral pneumonia caused by the COVID-19 has gained the attention of the people all over the world. We aim to investigate the effects of respiratory rehabilitation therapy on patients infected with the novel coronavirus by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This systematic review and meta-analysis have been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Viper information databases will be searched from inception time to date without restricting research types to find relevant studies. We will also look into reference lists of relevant trials and reviews, and manually search grey literature, such as trial registries. Two reviewers will independently extract data and perform quality assessment of included studies. Review Manager V.5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration) and Stata V.16.0 software will be used to conduct this meta-analysis. The mean difference or standardised mean difference with 95% CIs is used in the computation of continuous variables to synthesise data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required due to the nature of this meta-analysis, which is based on published papers. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal once we finish this study.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020180214.