Does Exercise Ventilatory Inefficiency Predict Poor Outcome in Heart Failure Patients With COPD?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate whether the opposite effects of heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) on exercise ventilatory inefficiency (minute ventilation [(Equation is included in full-text article.)E]-carbon dioxide output [(Equation is included in full-text article.)CO2] relationship) would negatively impact its prognostic relevance. METHODS: After treatment optimization and an incremental cardiopulmonary exercise test, 30 male patients with HF-COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] = 57% ± 17% predicted, ejection fraction = 35% ± 6%) were prospectively followed up during 412 ± 261 days for major cardiac events. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (46%) had a negative outcome. Patients who had an event had lower echocardiographically determined right ventricular fractional area change (RVFAC), greater ventilatory inefficiency (higher (Equation is included in full-text article.)E/(Equation is included in full-text article.)CO2 nadir), and lower end-tidal CO2 (PETCO2) (all P < .05). Multivariate Cox models revealed that (Equation is included in full-text article.)E/(Equation is included in full-text article.)CO2 nadir >36, ΔPETCO2(PEAK-REST)≥2 mm Hg, and PETCO2PEAK≤33 mm Hg added prognostic value to RVFAC≤45%. Kaplan-Meyer analyses showed that although 18% of patients with RVFAC>45% had a major cardiac event after 1 year, no patient with RVFAC>45% and (Equation is included in full-text article.)E/(Equation is included in full-text article.)CO2 nadir ≤36 (or PETCO2PEAK>33 mm Hg) had a negative event. Conversely, although 69% of patients with RVFAC≤45% had a major cardiac event after 1 year, all patients with RVFAC≤45% and ΔPETCO2(PEAK-REST)≥2 mm Hg had a negative event. CONCLUSION: Ventilatory inefficiency remains a powerful prognostic marker in HF despite the presence of mechanical ventilatory constraints induced by COPD. If these preliminary findings are confirmed in larger studies, optimal thresholds for outcome prediction are likely greater than those traditionally recommended for HF patients without COPD.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".