In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.

The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to HFA Silver & Gold Members, Fellows of the ESC and Young combined Members

Different prognostic predictors in cardiopulmonary exercise testing according to the aetiology of systolic heart failure

Session Poster session 3

Speaker Christopher Strong

Event : Heart Failure 2017

  • Topic : preventive cardiology
  • Sub-topic : Exercise Testing
  • Session type : Poster Session

Authors : CMF Strong (Lisbon,PT), H Dores (Lisbon,PT), M Mendes (Lisbon,PT), N Vale (Lisbon,PT), M Castro (Lisbon,PT), J Carmo (Lisbon,PT), J Mesquita (Lisbon,PT), S Guerreiro (Lisbon,PT)

CMF Strong1 , H Dores1 , M Mendes1 , N Vale1 , M Castro1 , J Carmo1 , J Mesquita1 , S Guerreiro1 , 1Hospital de Santa Cruz, Cardiology - Lisbon - Portugal ,

European Journal of Heart Failure ( 2017 ) 19 ( Suppl. S1 ), 492

Introduction: The Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing (CPET) has an important role in the risk stratification and prognostic evaluation of patients with Heart Failure and reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF). Several variables in CPET have been validated as independent predictors for a worse prognosis, but, their impact according to the aetiology of the HFrEF has not been established.

Purpose: To evaluate the prognostic value of CPET variables in patients with HFrEF according to the aetiology – Ischemic Vs Nonischemic HF.

Methods: Of all the patients submitted to CPET in our laboratory between 2009 and 2015, those with HFrEF (EF <40%), NYHA functional class II-III and optimal medical therapy were selected. The following variables of the CPET were studied: Peak VO2, VE/VCO2 slope, exercise oscillatory ventilation, PetCO2 at rest and during exercise, exercise blood pressure response to effort, electrocardiogram changes, heart rate recovery at 1 min and patient reason for test termination. During a mean 44 month follow-up, the independent predictors for the composite endpoint of hospitalization for decompensated heart failure, need for heart transplant and death of any cause, in both groups of patients, were determined using a Cox Regression.

Results: A total of 123 patients were included in the study (average age of 55±11 years; 80% of male gender), 57% with ischemic HFrEF, with the ramped protocol test being the most commonly used (65% of the cases). Patients with ischemic HFrEF were mostly male, and had a higher mean age. The composite endpoint occurred in 35% of the total sample. In patients with ischemic HFrEF the sole predictor for the composite endpoint was the Peak VO2 (HR 0.79, IC95% [0.69,0.91]; p<0.01), while in those with nonischemic HFrEF the predictors were the Peak VO2 (HR 0.84, IC95% [0.71,0.99]; p=0.04) and the VE/VCO2 slope (HR 1.09, IC95% [1.04,1.14]; p<0.01).

Conclusions: Of the CPET variables studied, the Peak VO2 was an independent predictor for the composite endpoint in both groups, with the VE/VCO2 slope having also been a predictor in the nonischemic HFrEF patients, probably reflecting a lower ventilatory efficiency as a result of the longer chronicity of the cardiac dysfunction.

Members get more

Join now
  • 1ESC Professional Members – access all resources from general ESC events 
  • 2ESC Association Members (Ivory, Silver, Gold) – access your Association’s resources
  • 3Under 40 or in training - with a Combined Membership, access all resources
Join now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are