Physiological and prognostic differences between types of exercise stress echocardiography for functional mitral regurgitation.
Aged
Asymptomatic Diseases
Echocardiography, Stress
/ methods
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Hand Strength
/ physiology
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Mitral Valve
/ diagnostic imaging
Mitral Valve Insufficiency
/ diagnosis
Myocardial Contraction
/ physiology
Prognosis
Prospective Studies
Risk Factors
Stroke Volume
/ physiology
Ventricular Function, Left
/ physiology
echocardiography
heart failure
mitral valve insufficiency
Journal
Open heart
ISSN: 2053-3624
Titre abrégé: Open Heart
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101631219
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
received:
15
01
2021
revised:
03
03
2021
accepted:
12
03
2021
entrez:
23
4
2021
pubmed:
24
4
2021
medline:
24
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) demonstrates dynamic change during exercise. This prospective observational study aimed to compare exercise stress echocardiography (ESE) where handgrip exercise (handgrip-ESE) or semisupine ergometer exercise was performed (ergometer-ESE) for patients with secondary MR. Handgrip-ESE and symptom-limited ergometer-ESE were performed for 53 patients (median age (IQR): 68 (58-78) years; 70% male) on the same day. Baseline global longitudinal strain (GLS) was 9.2% (6.0%-14.0%) and MR volume was 20 (14-26) mL. All-cause death and cardiac hospitalisation were tracked for median 439 (101-507) days. Handgrip-ESE induced slightly but significantly greater degrees of MR increase (median one grade increase; p<0.001) than ergometer-ESE, although the changes in other parameters, including GLS (+1.1% vs -0.6%, p<0.001), were significantly smaller. Correlations between the two examinations with respect to the changes in the echocardiographic parameters were weak. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed poor improvement in GLS during ergometer-ESE, but not the change in MR, was associated with adverse events (p=0.0065). No echocardiographic change observed during handgrip-ESE was prognostic. After adjusting for a clinical risk score, GLS changes during ergometer-ESE remained significant in predicting the adverse events (HR 0.39, p=0.03) A subgroup analysis in patients with moderate or greater MR at baseline (n=27) showed the same results as in the entire cohort. The physiological and prognostic implications of handgrip-ESE and ergometer-ESE findings significantly differ in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and secondary MR. The type of exercise to be performed in ESE should be carefully selected.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33888592
pii: openhrt-2021-001583
doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2021-001583
pmc: PMC8070867
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: NK is affiliated with and receives salary from a department funded by Philips Healthcare; Asahi KASEI Corporation; Inter Reha Co and Toho Holdings Co based on collaborative research agreements. PPS is a consultant to HeartSciences, Ultromics and Kencor Health.
Références
Circ J. 2016;80(1):139-47
pubmed: 26558879
Eur Heart J. 2017 Sep 21;38(36):2739-2791
pubmed: 28886619
Circulation. 2005 Jan 25;111(3):295-301
pubmed: 15655133
N Engl J Med. 2018 Dec 13;379(24):2307-2318
pubmed: 30280640
Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2020 Oct;35(4):417-418
pubmed: 31848989
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Mar;16(3):233-70
pubmed: 25712077
J Thorac Dis. 2018 Jul;10(7):4540-4555
pubmed: 30174907
Eur Heart J. 2012 Oct;33(19):2451-96
pubmed: 22922415
Eur Heart J. 2014 Jun 21;35(24):1608-16
pubmed: 24014387
Am Heart J. 1989 Oct;118(4):748-54
pubmed: 2801481
J Cardiol. 2015 Sep;66(3):246-52
pubmed: 25533424
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Aug;12(8 Pt 1):1566-1567
pubmed: 31395245
Am J Cardiol. 2000 Nov 1;86(9):903-7
pubmed: 11053696
J Echocardiogr. 2018 Mar;16(1):1-5
pubmed: 29362979
Circulation. 2003 Oct 7;108(14):1713-7
pubmed: 12975251
J Med Ultrason (2001). 2020 Jan;47(1):59-70
pubmed: 31446501
J Echocardiogr. 2015 Mar;13(1):1-5
pubmed: 26184515
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Feb;13(2 Pt 2):535-546
pubmed: 31103578
Eur Heart J. 2013 May;34(19):1404-13
pubmed: 23095984
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001 Nov 15;38(6):1685-92
pubmed: 11704381
Circulation. 2010 Jul 6;122(1):33-41
pubmed: 20566950
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016 Nov;17(11):1191-1229
pubmed: 27880640
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Jun;8(6):724-36
pubmed: 26068289
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 May 7;73(17):2209-2225
pubmed: 31047010
Circulation. 2001 Apr 3;103(13):1759-64
pubmed: 11282907
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Oct 9;10(19):1930-1931
pubmed: 28917513
Cardiology. 2009;112(4):244-59
pubmed: 18758181
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2017 Apr;30(4):303-371
pubmed: 28314623
Am Heart J. 2008 Apr;155(4):752-7
pubmed: 18371488
N Am J Med Sci. 2016 Jun;8(6):243-9
pubmed: 27500128
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Jun 1;20(6):620-624
pubmed: 31115470