4.4 Article

Diagnostic Yield of Customized Exercise Provocation Following Routine Testing

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 123, 期 12, 页码 2044-2050

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.03.027

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Clinical guidelines advocate for customization of exercise testing to address patient-specific diagnostic goals, including reproduction of presenting exertional symptoms. However, the diagnostic yield of adding customized exercise testing to graded exercise in patients presenting with exertional complaints has not been rigorously examined and is the focus of this study. Using prospectively collected data, we analyzed the diagnostic yield of customized additional exercise provocation following inconclusive graded exercise test with measurement of gas exchange. Additional testing was defined as positive if it revealed a clinically-actionable diagnosis related to the chief complaint or reproduced symptoms in the absence of an explanatory diagnosis or pathology. Of 1,110 patients who completed a graded test, 122 (11%) symptomatic patients underwent additional customized exercise testing (e.g., sprint intervals and race simulations). Compared with those who did not undergo additional testing, this group was younger (29 [interquartile range 19 to 45] vs 46 [25 to 58] year old) and disproportionately female (43% vs 27%). Presenting symptoms included palpitations (46%), lightheadedness/syncope (25%), chest pain (14%), dyspnea (11%), and exertional intolerance (3%). Additional testing was positive in 48 of 122 (39%) of patients by revealing a clinically actionable diagnosis in 26 of 48 (54%) or reproducing symptoms without an explanatory diagnosis in 22 of 48 (46%). In conclusion, while patient-centered customization of exercise testing is suggested by clinical guidelines, these data are the first to demonstrate that the selective addition of customized exercise provocation following inconclusive graded exercise testing improves the diagnostic yield of exercise assessment. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据