Ventilatory anaerobic threshold before and after cardiac valve surgery

Submaximal cardiopulmonary thresholds on a robotics-assisted tilt table, a cycle and a treadmill: a comparative analysis

Background

The robotics-assisted tilt table (RATT), including actuators for tilting and cyclical leg movement, is used for rehabilitation of severely disabled neurological patients. Following further engineering development of the system, i.e. the addition of force sensors and visual bio-feedback, patients can actively participate in exercise testing and training on the device. Peak cardiopulmonary performance parameters were previously investigated, but it also important to compare submaximal parameters with standard devices. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the RATT for estimation of submaximal exercise thresholds by comparison with a cycle ergometer and a treadmill.

Methods

17 healthy subjects randomly performed six maximal individualized incremental exercise tests, with two tests on each of the three exercise modalities. The ventilatory anaerobic threshold (VAT) and respiratory compensation point (RCP) were determined from breath-by-breath data.

Results

VAT and RCP on the RATT were lower than the cycle ergometer and the treadmill: oxygen uptake (V′O₂) at VAT was [mean (SD)] 1.2 (0.3), 1.5 (0.4) and 1.6 (0.5) L/min, respectively (p < 0.001); V′O₂ at RCP was 1.7 (0.4), 2.3 (0.8) and 2.6 (0.9) L/min, respectively (p = 0.001). High correlations for VAT and RCP were found between the RATT vs the cycle ergometer and RATT vs the treadmill (R on the range 0.69–0.80). VAT and RCP demonstrated excellent test–retest reliability for all three devices (ICC from 0.81 to 0.98). Mean differences between the test and retest values on each device were close to zero. The ventilatory equivalent for O₂ at VAT for the RATT and cycle ergometer were similar and both were higher than the treadmill. The ventilatory equivalent for CO₂ at RCP was similar for all devices. Ventilatory equivalent parameters demonstrated fair-to-excellent reliability and repeatability.

Conclusions

It is feasible to use the RATT for estimation of submaximal exercise thresholds: VAT and RCP on the RATT were lower than the cycle ergometer and the treadmill, but there were high correlations between the RATT vs the cycle ergometer and vs the treadmill. Repeatability and test–retest reliability of all submaximal threshold parameters from the RATT were comparable to those of standard devices.

Hemodynamic and physical performance during maximal exercise in patients with an aortic bioprosthetic valve: comparison of stentless versus stented bioprostheses

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare stentless bioprostheses with stented bioprostheses with regard to their hemodynamic behavior during exercise.

BACKGROUND

Stentless aortic bioprostheses have better hemodynamic performances at rest than stented bioprostheses, but very few comparisons were performed during exercise.

METHODS

Thirty-eight patients with normally functioning stentless (n = 19) or stented (n = 19) bioprostheses were submitted to a maximal ramp upright bicycle exercise test. Valve effective orifice area and mean transvalvular pressure gradient at rest and during peak exercise were successfully measured using Doppler echocardiography in 30 of the 38 patients.

RESULTS

At peak exercise, the mean gradient increased significantly less in stentless than in stented bioprostheses (+5 +/- 3 vs. +12 +/- 8 mm Hg; p = 0.002) despite similar increases in mean flow rates (+137 +/- 58 vs. +125 +/- 65 ml/s; p = 0.58); valve area also increased but with no significant difference between groups. Despite this hemodynamic difference, exercise capacity was not significantly different, but left ventricular (LV) mass and function were closer to normal in stentless bioprostheses. Overall, there was a strong inverse relation between the mean gradient during peak exercise and the indexed valve area at rest (r = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Hemodynamics during exercise are better in stentless than stented bioprostheses due to the larger resting indexed valve area of stentless bioprostheses. This is associated with beneficial effects with regard to LV mass and function. The relation found between the resting indexed valve area and the gradient during exercise can be used to project the hemodynamic behavior of these bioprostheses at the time of operation. It should thus be useful to select the optimal prosthesis given the patient's body surface area and level of physical activity.

Usefulness of the indexed effective orifice area at rest in predicting an increase in gradient during maximum exercise in patients with a bioprosthesis in the aortic valve position

This study examines the hemodynamic behavior of aortic bioprosthetic valves during maximum exercise. Nineteen patients with a normally functioning stented bioprosthetic valve and preserved left ventricular function were submitted to maximum ramp bicycle exercise. In 14 of the 19 patients, valve effective orifice area and mean gradient were measured at rest and during exercise using Doppler echocardiography. At peak exercise (mean maximal workload 118 +/- 53 W), the cardiac index increased by 122 +/- 34% (+3.18 +/- 0.71 L/min/ m2, p <0.001), whereas mean gradient increased by 94 +/- 49% (+12 +/- 8 mm Hg, p <0.001), and effective orifice area by 9 +/- 13% (+0.15 +/- 0.22 cm2, p = 0.02). A strong correlation was found between the increase in mean gradient during maximum exercise and the valve area at rest indexed for body surface area (r = 0.84, p <0.0001). Due to the increase in valve area, the increase in gradient was less (-9 +/- 7 mm Hg, -41 +/- 33%, p = 0.0006) than theoretically predicted assuming a fixed valve area. These results suggest that the effective orifice area of the bioprostheses has the capacity to increase during exercise; therefore, limiting the increase in gradient. The relation found between the indexed effective orifice area at rest and the increase in gradient during exercise should be useful in predicting the hemodynamic behavior of a stented bioprosthesis during exercise.