Search

Background Heart failure patients demonstrate reduced functional capacity, hemodynamic function, and quality of life (QOL) which are associated with high mortality and morbidity rate. The aim of the present study was to assess the relationship between functional capacity, hemodynamic response to exercise and QOL in chronic heart failure. Methods A single-centre prospective study recruited 42 chronic heart failure patients (11 females, mean age 60 ± 10 years) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF = 23 ± 7%). All participants completed a maximal graded cardiopulmonary exercise test with non-invasive hemodynamic (bioreactance) monitoring. QOL was assessed using Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire. Results The average value of QOL score was 40 ± 23. There was a significant negative relationship between the QOL and peak O2 consumption (r = − 0.50, p ≤ 0.01). No significant relationship between the QOL and selected exercise hemodynamic measures was found, including peak exercise cardiac power output (r = 0.15, p = 0.34), cardiac output (r = 0.22, p = 0.15), and mean arterial blood pressure (r = − 0.08, p = 0.60). Conclusion Peak O2 consumption, but not hemodynamic response to exercise, is a significant determinant of QOL in chronic heart failure patients.

Single-use electrocardiography (ECG) leads have been developed to reduce healthcare-associated infection. This study compared the validity and reliability of short-term heart rate variability (HRV) obtained from single-use disposable ECG leads.Thirty healthy subjects (33 ± 10 years; 9 females) underwent 5-min resting HRV assessments using disposable (single use) ECG cable and wire system (Kendall DL™ Cardinal Health) and a standard, reusable ECG leads (CardioExpress, Spacelabs Healthcare).Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with 95% confidence interval (CI) between disposable and reusable ECG leads was for the time domain [R-R interval (ms); 0.99 (0.91, 1.00)], the root mean square of successive normal R-R interval differences (RMSSD) (ms); 0.91 (0.76, 0.96), the SD of normal-to-normal R-R intervals (SDNN) (ms); 0.91 (0.68, 0.97) and frequency domain [low-frequency (LF) normalized units (nu); 0.90 (0.79, 0.95), high frequency (HF) nu; 0.91 (0.80, 0.96), LF power (msSingle-use Kendall DL™ ECG leads demonstrate a valid and reproducible tool for the assessment of HRV.

Diagnostic tools available to support general practitioners diagnose heart failure (HF) are limited.(i) Determine the feasibility of the novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test in suspected HF patients, and (ii) Identify differences in the CORS results between (a) confirmed HF patients from non-HF patients, and (b) HF reduced (HFrEF) vs HF preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction.Single centre, prospective, observational, feasibility study. Consecutive patients with suspected HF (N = 105; mean age: 72 ± 10 years) were recruited from specialized HF diagnostic clinics in secondary care. The consultant cardiologist confirmed or refuted a HF diagnosis. The patient completed the CORS but the researcher administering the test was blinded from the diagnosis. The CORS assessed cardiac function (stroke volume index, SVI) noninvasively using the bioreactance technology at rest-supine, challenge-standing, and stress-step exercise phases.A total of 38 patients were newly diagnosed with HF (HFrEF, n = 21) with 79% being able to complete all phases of the CORS (91% of non-HF patients). A 17% lower SVI was found in HF compared with non-HF patients at rest-supine (43 ± 15 vs 51 ± 16 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02) and stress-step exercise phase (49 ± 16 vs 58 ± 17 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02). HFrEF patients demonstrated a lower SVI at rest (39 ± 15 vs 48 ± 13 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.02) and challenge-standing phase (34 ± 9 vs 42 ± 12 mL/beat/m2, P = 0.03) than HFpEF patients.The CORS is feasible and patients with HF responded differently to non-HF, and HFrEF from HFpEF. These findings provide further evidence for the potential use of the CORS to improve HF diagnostic and referral accuracy in primary care.Heart failure (HF) is a global pandemic affecting 26 million people worldwide with an estimated 1 million people in the United Kingdom. Accurate early diagnosis of HF and the initiation of evidence-based treatment is essential to reduce morbidity and mortality and the associated burden on healthcare. As there are no state-of-the-art approaches, early diagnosis is challenging and often inaccurate, as initial signs and symptoms are nonspecific. We have developed an innovative test, named CORS (cardiac output response to stress test), to help general practitioners identify HF, which uses a method similar to an electrocardiogram and measures heart function at rest and during short step exercise. We recruited suspected HF patients from specialist HF diagnostic clinics in secondary care to complete the CORS test. We successfully demonstrated that 79% of patients with newly diagnosed HF (n = 38) and 91% of non-HF patients (n = 67) were able to complete all phases of the CORS test. Our findings demonstrate that newly diagnosed HF patients are able to complete this test, which provides further evidence for the potential use of the CORS test to improve HF diagnostic and referral accuracy in primary care.

Exercise intolerance is a cardinal symptom of patients with heart failure (HF). We hypothesized that patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in comparison with those with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have disproportionate exercise-induced impairment of left atrial (LA) function that may explain the effort intolerance.Total 40 HFpEF patients, 40 HFrEF patients, and 20 matched healthy controls underwent resting and exercise stress transthoracic echocardiography using modified Bruce protocol with speckle-tracking derived assessments of peak atrial longitudinal strain (PALS) and left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS).In comparison to controls, PALS and LVGLS were reduced in HFpEF and HFrEF patients (P 0.01); however, the strain magnitudes were significantly lower in HFrEF than in HFpEF (P 0.01). Both HFpEF and HFrEF showed a 28% and 30% reduction in exercise time in comparison with controls (HFpEF, 363 ± 152, HFrEF 352 ± 91, controls, 505 ± 42 s, P 0.01) and exercise-related rise in E/E' in HFpEF patients. However, during exercise PALS reduced from resting values by 26% (resting 23.1 ± 4.7 and peak 18.5 ± 3.5, P 0.01) in HFpEF but only 8% in HFrEF (resting 11.5 ± 1.4 and peak 10.5 ± 1.5, P 0.01), and remained unchanged in controls (resting 34 ± 1.9 and peak 34.4 ± 1.2, P = 0.4). Regression analysis of the combined data from the HF patients and controls revealed that PALS was independently associated with exercise time such that a 1% reduction in PALS was associated with a 10 s reduction in exercise duration (p 0.01). PALS at baseline and peak exercise differentiated normal from HF patients. LVGLS at baseline and peak exercise differentiated HFpEF from HFrEF and patients of HFpEF showed abnormality of both PALS and LVGLS.Although left ventricle and LA strain are lower in HFrEF than HFpEF at rest and exercise compared to healthy controls, patients with HFpEF show more profound deterioration of LA reservoir function with exercise which appears to contribute to exercise intolerance.