4.6 Article

Betablockers reduce oxygen pulse increase and performance in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 370, 期 -, 页码 309-318

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.10.009

关键词

beta blocker; HFpEF; Exercise performance; CPET

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Beta blockers (BB) have an impact on exercise capacity and oxygen uptake efficiency slope (OUES) in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients. BB has a significant effect on the high-risk group but not on the low-risk group. Direct quantification of O 2 pulse may improve the discrimination of HFpEF patients.
Background: Beta blockers (BB) reduce chronotropic response and exercise capacity in heart failure with pre-served ejection fraction (HFpEF). To analyze the influence of BB on exercise performance and O 2 pulse increase as a surrogate for stroke volume in HFpEF.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the influence of BB intake (yes: n = 48/no: n = 51) on peak oxygen uptake (VO 2peak), oxygen uptake efficiency slope (OUES), and increase of O 2 pulse in HFpEF patients undergoing cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). Associations of outcome variables and risk category of the algorithm of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-PEFF score) were calculated.Results: Patients on BB showed lower VO 2peak (p = .003) and OUES (p = .002), with a dominant effect in the high-risk (p = .020; 0.002), but not in the low risk-group (p = .434; p = .499). In the intermediate group BB showed a trend towards lower VO 2peak (p = .078) and lower values for OUES (p = .020). Patients on BB also demonstrated a lower increase of O 2 pulse during exercise (p = .002), without differences between HFA-PEFF risk groups (low: p = .322, intermediate: p = .269, high: p = .313).Conclusions: BB reduce exercise capacity and O 2 pulse increase in HFpEF patients. Direct quantification of O 2 pulse increase may help to improve the discrimination of HFpEF patients.

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

4.6
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