Franciele Plachi

Low exertional inspiratory capacity is not related to dynamic inspiratory muscle weakness in heart failure

Reduction in inspiratory capacity (IC) during exercise has been reported in chronic heart failure (CHF). Since inspiratory muscle dysfunction may be present to a variable degree, the assumption that IC reduction during exercise represents an increase in end-expiratory lung volume must be made with caution. This interpretation is flawed if patients develop dynamic inspiratory muscle strength reduction, i.e., progressively lower esophageal (Pes) pressures as the IC maneuvers are repeated. Sixteen CHF patients and 9 age-matched controls performed an incremental exercise test with serial IC and respiratory pressure measurements. Regardless whether IC decreased or not with exercise (N = 4 and N = 12, respectively), Pes,IC remained stable. This was confirmed by similar Pes,sniff immediately upon exercise cessation (p > .05). No association was found between changes in IC and related Pes from rest to peak exercise. Owing to the lack of dynamic inspiratory muscle weakness, non-invasive indexes of lung mechanics can be reliably obtained from exercise IC in CHF.

A Simplified Approach to Select Exercise Endurance Intensity for Interventional Studies in COPD

ABSTRACT Time to exercise limitation (Tlim) in response to constant work rate (CWR) is sensitive to interventions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This is particularly true when the pre-intervention test lasts between 3 and 8 min (Tlim3′–8′). There is, however, no simple method to select a work rate which is consistently associated with Tlim3′–8′ across the spectrum of COPD severity. We assessed 59 GOLD stages II–IV patients who initially cycled to Tlim at 75% peak. In case of short (<3 min, low-endurance) or long (>8 min, high-endurance) tests, patients exercised after 60 min at 50% or 90%, respectively (CWR50%⇐75%⇒90%). Critical mechanical constraints and limiting dyspnea at 75% were reached within the desired timeframe in 27 “mid-endurance” patients (46%). Increasing work rate intensity to 90% hastened the mechanical-ventilatory responses leading to Tlim3′–8′ in 23/26 (88%) “high-endurance” patients; conversely, decreasing exercise intensity to 50% slowed those responses leading to Tlim3′–8′ in 5/6 (83%) “high-endurance” patients. Repeating the tests at higher (60%) or lower (80%) intensities fail to consistently produce Tlim3′–8′ in “low-” and “high-endurance”, respectively (p > 0.05). Compared to a fixed work rate at 75%, CWR50%⇐75%⇒90% significantly decreased Tlims coefficient of variation; consequently, the required N to detect 100 s or 33% improvement in Tlim decreased from 82 to 26 and 41 to 14, respectively. This simplified approach to individualized work rate adjustment (CWR50%⇐75%⇒90%) might allow greater sensitivity in evaluating interventional efficacy in improving respiratory mechanics and exercise tolerance while simultaneously reducing sample size requirements in patients with COPD.