Comparison of cardiac output estimates by bioreactance and inert gas rebreathing methods during cardiopulmonary exercise testing

Agreement of concomitant cardiac output measurement by thoracic bio-impedance and inert gas rebreathing in healthy subjects

PURPOSE

Inasmuch as they are deemed valid, noninvasive measurement of cardiac output techniques present advantages of ease and safety for use in humans. Few studies have compared the use of thoracic bioimpedance and inert gas rebreathing techniques for cardiac output (CO) assessment at rest and exercise. This manuscript reports on differences between Physioflow® and Innocor® CO measurements at rest and during cycling in a population of healthy subjects.

METHODS

Fifty healthy subjects (52 ± 16 years) underwent an incremental cycle exercise testing (IET) during which standardized Physioflow® and Innocor® CO assessments were achieved. Measurements were completed in a subgroup of twelve subjects during two constant-load 10-min cycling bouts at moderate and high intensities.

RESULTS

Mean difference between Physioflow® and Innocor® was of 0.002 ± 0.98 l/min at rest and 0.38 ± 1.31 l/min during IET without statistical difference. Correlation coefficient values were higher for exercise (r = 0.83) than resting (r = 0.40) measurements. Good reproducibility of the two devices was observed on different graded exercises with intraindividual variability lower than 6%, except for rest Innocor® CO measurements (CV = 18%).

CONCLUSION

Physioflow® and Innocor® can be easily used concomitantly for noninvasive measurement of CO. Despite finding a strong agreement between techniques for exercise CO, results should not be interpreted as being interchangeable as values are derived from different flow measurements: systemic blood flow for Physioflow® and pulmonary blood flow for Innocor®. However, the concomitant use of both techniques could be of value in clinical setting for noninvasive intrathoracic shunt quantification.

Clinical validation of an artificial intelligence-based decision support system for diagnosis and risk stratification of heart failure (STRATIFYHF): a protocol for a prospective, multicentre longitudinal study

INTRODUCTION

Heart failure (HF) is a complex clinical syndrome. Accurate risk stratification and early diagnosis of HF are challenging as its signs and symptoms are non-specific. We propose to address this global challenge by developing the STRATIFYHF artificial intelligence-driven decision support system (DSS), which uses novel analytical methods in determining the risk, diagnosis and prognosis of HF. The primary aim of the present study is to collect prospective clinical data to validate the STRATIFYHF DSS (in terms of diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity) as a tool to predict the risk, diagnosis and progression of HF. The secondary outcomes are the demographic and clinical predictors of risk, diagnosis and progression of HF.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

STRATIFYHF is a prospective, multicentre, longitudinal study that will recruit up to 1600 individuals (n=800 suspected/at risk of HF and n=800 diagnosed with HF) aged ≥45 years old, with up to 24 months of follow-up observations. Individuals suspected of HF will be divided into two categories based on current definitions and predefined inclusion criteria. All participants will have their medical history recorded, along with data on physical examination (signs and symptoms), blood tests including serum natriuretic peptides levels, ECG and echocardiogram results, as well as demographic, socioeconomic and lifestyle data, and use of complete novel technologies (cardiac output response to stress test and voice recognition biomarkers). All measurements will be recorded at baseline and at 12-month follow-up, with medical history and hospitalisation also recorded at 24-month follow-up. Cardiovascular MRI assessment will be completed in a subset of participants (n=20-40) from eligible clinical centres only at baseline. Each clinical centre will recruit a subset of participants (n=30) who will complete a 6-month home-based monitoring of clinical characteristics and accelerometry (wrist-worn monitor) to determine the feasibility and acceptability of the STRATIFYHF mobile application. Focus groups and semistructured interviews will be conducted with up to 15 healthcare professionals and up to 20 study participants (10 at risk of HF and 10 diagnosed with HF) to explore the needs of patients and healthcare professionals prior to the development of the STRATIFYHF DSS and to evaluate the acceptability of this mobile application.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted by the East Midlands - Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee (24/EM/0101). Dissemination activities will include journal publications and presentations at conferences, as well as development of training materials and delivery of focused training on the STRATIFYHF DSS and mobile application. We will develop and propose policy guidelines for integration of the STRATIFYHF DSS and mobile application into the standard of care in the HF care pathway.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06377319.

Non-Invasive Cardiac Output Measurement Using Inert Gas Rebreathing Method during Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing-A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The use of inert gas rebreathing for the non-invasive cardiac output measurement has produced measurements comparable to those obtained by various other methods. However, there are no guidelines for the inert gas rebreathing method during a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET). In addition, there is also a lack of specific standards for assessing the non-invasive measurement of cardiac output during CPET, both for healthy patients and those suffering from diseases and conditions.

AIM

This systematic review aims to describe the use of IGR for a non-invasive assessment of cardiac output during cardiopulmonary exercise testing and, based on the information extracted, to identify a proposed CPET report that includes an assessment of the cardiac output using the IGR method.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted by PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses) guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception until 29 December 2022. The primary search returned 261 articles, of which 47 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a comprehensive description of protocols, indications, technical details, and proposed reporting standards for a non-invasive cardiac output assessment using IGR during CPET. It highlights the need for standardized approaches to CPET and identifies gaps in the literature. The review critically analyzes the strengths and limitations of the studies included and offers recommendations for future research by proposing a combined report from CPET-IGR along with its clinical application.

Application of non-invasive bioreactance to assess hemodynamic function in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Non-invasive technologies have become popular for the clinical evaluation of cardiac function. The present study evaluated hemodynamic response to cardiopulmonary exercise stress testing using bioreactance technology in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. The study included 29 patients with HCM (age 55 ± 15 years; 28% female) and 12 age (55 ± 14 years), and gender matched (25% female) healthy controls. All participants underwent maximal graded cardiopulmonary exercise stress testing with simultaneous non-invasive hemodynamic bioreactance and gas exchange. At rest, patients with HCM demonstrated significantly lower cardiac output (4.1 ± 1.3 vs. 6.1 ± 1.2 L/min; p < 0.001), stroke volume (61.5 ± 20.8 vs. 89.5 ± 19.8 mL/beat; p < 0.001), and cardiac power output (0.97 ± 0.3 vs. 1.4 ± 0.3watt; p < 0.001), compared to controls. At peak exercise, the following hemodynamic and metabolic variables were lower in HCM patients that is, heart rate (118 ± 29 vs. 156 ± 20 beats/min; p < 0.001), cardiac output (15.5 ± 5.8 vs. 20.5 ± 4.7 L/min; p = 0.017), cardiac power output (4.3 ± 1.6 vs. 5.9 ± 1.8 watts; p = 0.017), mean arterial blood pressure (126 ± 11 vs. 134 ± 10 mmHg; p = 0.039), and oxygen consumption (18.3 ± 6.0 vs. 30.5 ± 8.3 mL/kg/min; p < 0.001), respectively. Peak arteriovenous oxygen difference and stroke volume were not significantly different between HCM patients and healthy controls (11.2 ± 6.4 vs. 11.9 ± 3.1 mL/100 mL, p = 0.37 and 131 ± 50.6 vs. 132 ± 41.9 mL/beat, p = 0.76). There was a moderate positive relationship between peak oxygen consumption and peak heart rate (r = 0.67, p < 0.001), and arteriovenous oxygen difference (r = 0.59, p = 0.001). Functional capacity is significantly reduced in patients with HCM primarily due to diminished central (cardiac) rather than peripheral factors. Application of non-invasive hemodynamic assessment may improve understanding of the pathophysiology and explain mechanisms of exercise intolerance in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Validity of Hemodynamic Monitoring Using Inert Gas Rebreathing Method in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure and Those Implanted With a Left Ventricular Assist Device

OBJECTIVE

The present study assessed agreement between resting cardiac output estimated by inert gas rebreathing (IGR) and thermodilution methods in patients with heart failure and those implanted with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Hemodynamic measurements were obtained in 42 patients, 22 with chronic heart failure and 20 with implanted continuous flow LVAD (34 males, aged 50 ± 11 years). Measurements were performed at rest using thermodilution and IGR methods. Cardiac output derived by thermodilution and IGR were not significantly different in LVAD (4.4 ± 0.9 L/min vs 4.7 ± 0.8 L/min, P = .27) or patients with heart failure (4.4 ± 1.4 L/min vs 4.5 ± 1.3 L/min, P = .75). There was a strong relationship between thermodilution and IGR cardiac index (r = 0.81, P = .001) and stroke volume index (r = 0.75, P = .001). Bland-Altman analysis showed acceptable limits of agreement for cardiac index derived by thermodilution and IGR, namely, the mean difference (lower and upper limits of agreement) for patients with heart failure -0.002 L/min/m² (-0.65 to 0.66 L/min/m²), and -0.14 L/min/m² (-0.78 to 0.49 L/min/m²) for patients with LVAD.

CONCLUSIONS

IGR is a valid method for estimating cardiac output and should be used in clinical practice to complement the evaluation and management of chronic heart failure and patients with an LVAD.

Noninvasive Assessment of Cardiac Output in Advanced Heart Failure and Heart Transplant Candidates Using the Bioreactance Method

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to assess the validity and trending ability of the bioreactance method in estimating cardiac output at rest and in response to stress in advanced heart failure patients and heart transplant candidates.

DESIGN

This was a prospective single-center study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at the heart transplant center at the Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighteen patients with advanced chronic heart failure due to reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (19 ± 7%), and peak oxygen consumption 12.3 ± 3.9 mL/kg/min.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants underwent right heart catheterization using the Swan-Ganz catheter.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Cardiac output was measured simultaneously using thermodilution and bioreactance at rest and during active straight leg raise test to volitional exertion. There was no significant difference in cardiac index values obtained by the thermodilution and bioreactance methods (2.26 ± 0.59 v 2.38 ± 0.50 L/min, p > 0.05) at rest and peak straight leg raise test (2.92 ± 0.77 v 3.01 ± 0.66 L/min, p > 0.05). In response to active leg raise test, thermodilution cardiac output increased by 22% and bioreactance by 21%. There was also a strong relationship between cardiac outputs from both methods at rest (r = 0.88, p < 0.01) and peak straight leg raise test (r = 0.92, p < 0.01). Cartesian plot analysis showed good trending ability of bioreactance compared with thermodilution (concordance rate = 93%) CONCLUSIONS: `Cardiac output measured by the bioreactance method is comparable to that from the thermodilution method. Bioreactance method may be used in clinical practice to assess hemodynamics and improve management of advanced heart failure patients undergoing heart transplant assessment.

Comparison of cardiac output estimates by echocardiography and bioreactance at rest and peak dobutamine stress test in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction

PURPOSE

To assess the agreement between cardiac output estimated by two-dimensional echocardiography and bioreactance methods at rest and during dobutamine stress test in heart failure patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFpEF).

METHODS

Hemodynamic measurements were assessed in 20 stable HFpEF patients (12 females; aged 61 ± 7 years) using echocardiography and bioreactance methods during rest and dobutamine stress test at increment dosages of 5, 10, 15, and 20 μg/kg/min until maximal dose was achieved or symptoms and sign occurred, that is, chest pain, abnormal blood pressure elevation, breathlessness, ischemic changes, or arrhythmia.

RESULTS

Resting cardiac output and cardiac index estimated by bioreactance and echocardiography were not significantly different. At peak dobutamine stress test, cardiac output and cardiac index estimated by echocardiography and bioreactance were significantly different (7.06 ± 1.43 vs 5.71 ± 1.59 L/min, P < .01; and 4.27 ± 0.67 vs 3.43 ± 0.87 L/m² /min; P < .01) due to the significant differences in stroke volume. There was a strong positive relationship between cardiac outputs obtained by the two methods at peak dobutamine stress (r = .79, P < .01). The mean difference (lower and upper limits of agreement) between bioreactance and echocardiography cardiac outputs at rest and peak dobutamine stress was -0.45 (1.71 to -2.62) L/min and -1.35 (0.60 to -3.31) L/min, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Bioreactance and echocardiography methods provide different cardiac output values at rest and during stress thus cannot be used interchangeably. Ability to continuously monitor key hemodynamic variables such as cardiac output, stroke volume, and heart rate is the major advantage of bioreactance method.

Maternal Cardiovascular Dysfunction is Associated with Hypoxic Cerebral and Umbilical Doppler Changes

We investigate the relationship between maternal cardiovascular (CV) function and fetal Doppler changes in healthy pregnancies and those with pre-eclampsia (PE), small for gestational age (SGA) or fetal growth restriction (FGR). This was a three-centre prospective study, where CV assessment was performed using inert gas rebreathing, continuous Doppler or impedance cardiography. Maternal cardiac output (CO) and peripheral vascular resistance (PVR) were analysed in relation to the uterine artery, umbilical artery (UA) and middle cerebral artery (MCA) pulsatility indices (PI, expressed as z-scores by gestational week) using polynomial regression analyses, and in relation to the presence of absent/reversed end diastolic (ARED) flow in the UA. We included 81 healthy controls, 47 women with PE, 65 with SGA/FGR and 40 with PE + SGA/FGR. Maternal CO was inversely related to fetal UA PI and positively related to MCA PI; the opposite was observed for PVR, which was also positively associated with increased uterine artery impedance. CO was lower (z-score 97, p = 0.02) and PVR higher (z-score 2.88, p = 0.02) with UA ARED flow. We report that maternal CV dysfunction is associated with fetal vascular changes, namely raised impedance in the fetal-placental circulation and low impedance in the fetal cerebral vessels. These findings are most evident with critical UA Doppler changes and represent a potential mechanism for therapeutic intervention.

A novel cardiac output response to stress test developed to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care

AIMS

Primary care physicians lack access to an objective cardiac function test. This study for the first time describes a novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test developed to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care and investigates its reproducibility.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Prospective observational study recruited 32 consecutive primary care patients (age, 63 ± 9 years; female, n = 18). Cardiac output was measured continuously using the bioreactance method in supine and standing positions and during two 3 min stages of a step-exercise protocol (10 and 15 steps per minute) using a 15 cm height bench. The CORS test was performed on two occasions, i.e. Test 1 and Test 2. There was no significant difference between repeated measures of cardiac output and stroke volume at supine standing and Stage 1 and Stage 2 step exercises (all P > 0.3). There was a significant positive relationship between Test 1 and Test 2 cardiac outputs (r = 0.92, P = 0.01 with coefficient of variation of 7.1%). The mean difference in cardiac output (with upper and lower limits of agreement) between Test 1 and Test 2 was 0.1 (-1.9 to 2.1) L/min, combining supine, standing, and step-exercise data.

CONCLUSIONS

The CORS, as a novel test for objective evaluation of cardiac function, demonstrates acceptable reproducibility and can potentially be implemented in primary care.