Cargando…

Relation of left atrial function with exercise capacity and muscle endurance in patients with heart failure

AIMS: Both left atrial strain (LAS) and skeletal muscle endurance demonstrate a linear relationship to peak VO(2). Less is known about the relationship between central (cardiac) and peripheral (muscle endurance) limitations of exercise capacity in patients with heart failure (HF). We investigated th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bekfani, Tarek, Hamadanchi, Ali, Ijuin, Shun, Bekhite, Mohamed, Nisser, Jenny, Derlien, Steffen, Westphal, Julian, Bogoviku, Jurgen, Morris, Daniel A., Fudim, Marat, Braun‐Dullaeus, Rüdiger C., Möbius‐Winkler, Sven, Schulze, P. Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8712812/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34726343
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13656
Descripción
Sumario:AIMS: Both left atrial strain (LAS) and skeletal muscle endurance demonstrate a linear relationship to peak VO(2). Less is known about the relationship between central (cardiac) and peripheral (muscle endurance) limitations of exercise capacity in patients with heart failure (HF). We investigated this relationship using novel cardiac markers such as LAS and left atrial emptying fraction (LAEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed echocardiographic measurements, cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), and isokinetic muscle function in 55 subjects with HF and controls [17 heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), 18 heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), and 20 healthy controls]. Patients with reduced LAEF showed reduced peak VO(2): 14.3 ± 3.5 vs. 18.5 ± 3.5 mL/min/kg, P = 0.003, and reduced muscle endurance (RME): 64.3 ± 23.9 vs. 88.5 ± 32.3 Nm/kg, P = 0.028. Patients with reduced LAS showed similar results. Neither left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) nor left atrial volume index (LAVI) was associated with RME. The area under the curve of LAS and LAEF in patients with HF in association with RME were (0.76 vs. 0.80) with 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.59–0.96, P = 0.012 vs. 0.63–0.98, P = 0.006, respectively). In a multiple linear regression, LAEF and working load measured during CPET (watt) were independent factors for RME after adjusting for age, LVGLS, and 6 min walk test (6MWT) [LAEF (B: 0.09, 95% CI: 1.01; 1.18, P = 0.024), working load (B: 0.05, 95% CI: 1.01; 1.08, P = 0.006)]. Peak torque of the left leg was associated with E/LAS (E: early diastolic) in patients with HFpEF (r = −0.6, P = 0.020). Endurance of the left leg was associated with LAEF (r = 0.79, P = 0.001) in patients with HFrEF. CONCLUSIONS: LAS/LAEF are potential cardiac markers in demonstrating the link between cardiac and peripheral limitations of exercise capacity. Thus, integrating LAS/LAEF in the evaluation of exercise intolerance in patients with HF could be useful.