Attenuation of the Threshold for Myocardial Ischemia in Ramp vs Standard Bruce Protocol in Patients with Positive Exercise Stress Test and Angiographically Demonstrated Coronary Artery Narrowing?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Gradual instead of abrupt increases in workload favour a more physiological response in terms of hemodynamic and gas exchange parameters. Therefore, we sought to determine whether myocardial ischemia is attenuated with a ramp compared to a standard Bruce exercise protocol in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: We compared ischemic parameters on the Bruce protocol with an individualized ergocycle ramp protocol in 18 men with documented CAD (≥ 70% stenosis) and a reproducible ischemic ECG exercise test. These 2 symptom-limited tests were performed in random order 2 weeks apart. Oxygen consumption (VO2), ischemic threshold [systolic blood pressure x heart rate (RPP) at 1 mm ST-segment depression], and maximum ST-segment depression corresponding to the highest RPP common to the 2 tests (AdjSTmax) were determined. Results: While all subjects showed ischemia on the treadmill, 6/18 did not on the ergocycle. However, ischemic threshold was higher on the ramp than the Bruce protocol (23 420 ± 5 732 vs 20 018 ± 3 542 bpm•min-1•mmHg; P=0.007). Peak RPP was higher during the ramp than with the Bruce protocol (28 492 ± 6 450 vs 25 519 ± 6 067 bpm•min-1•mmHg, respectively; P=0.02), despite similar peak VO2 (25.59 ± 5.05 vs 26.39 ± 4.65 mlO2•kg-1•min-1, respectively; P=0.6). AdjSTmax was less on the ramp than the Bruce protocol (-1.2 ± 0.9 vs -1.9 ± 0.7 mm; P=0.003). Conclusion: Exercise-induced myocardial ischemia is markedly attenuated on the more gradually increasing workload of the individualized ramp ergocycle compared with the standard Bruce treadmill protocol. This effect is unexplained by energy expenditure (VO2) or myocardial work (RPP) and is consistent with a “warm-up” ischemic mechanism. The more gradually increasing workload of the ramp ergocycle protocol may have favoured a “warm-up” ischemic effect despite achieving higher RPP than the Bruce protocol treadmill suggesting it may be physiologically preferable for exercise prescription in patients with CAD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".