Chronic heart failure, chronotropic incompetence, and the effects of blockade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish the prevalence of chronotropic incompetence in a cohort of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) taking modern medications for heart failure, and whether this affected exercise capacity and predicted prognosis. METHODS: Heart rate response to exercise was examined in 237 patients with CHF in sinus rhythm, who were compared with 118 control volunteers. The percentage of maximum age predicted peak heart rate (%Max-PPHR) and percentage heart rate reserve (%HRR) were calculated, with a cut off of < 80% as the definition of chronotropic incompetence for both. Patients were followed up for an average (SD) of 2.8 (9) years. Mortality was related to peak oxygen consumption (pVo2), and the presence or absence of chronotropic incompetence. RESULTS: %Max-PPHR < 80% identified 103 (43%) and %HRR < 80% identified 170 patients (72%) as having chronotropic incompetence. Chronotropic incompetence was more common in patients taking beta blockers than in those not taking beta blockers as assessed by both methods (80 (49%) v 23 (32%) by %Max-PPHR and 123 (75%) v 47 (64%) by %HRR, respectively). Patients with chronotropic incompetence by either method had a lower pVo2 than those without. These differences remained significant for both patients taking and not taking a beta blocker. %HRR, Max-PPHR%, and HRR were related to New York Heart Association class and correlated with pVo2. There was no difference in the slopes relating heart rate to pVo2 between patients with and those without chronotropic incompetence (6.1 (1.7) v 5.1 (1.8), p = 0.34). During an average 2.8 year follow up 40 patients (17%) died. In Cox proportional hazard models, pVo2 was the most powerful predictor of survival and neither measure of chronotropic incompetence independently predicted outcome. CONCLUSIONS: pVo2 is a powerful marker of prognosis for patients with CHF whether they are taking beta blockers or not. A low heart rate response to exercise in patients with CHF correlates with worse exercise tolerance but is unlikely to contribute to exercise impairment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".