Mechanisms Determining VO <sub>2peak</sub> During Single Leg Knee‐Extension Exercise in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Patients: Peripheral vs. Central Phenotypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is characterized by exercise intolerance, including a reduced maximal aerobic capacity that affects all aspects of daily living. The mechanisms responsible for the decreased exercise tolerance in HFpEF are incompletely understood. Our research group has characterized two unique HFpEF phenotypes based on cardiac output reserve relative to exercise metabolic work: those with either a “central” (Type A) or “peripheral” (Type B) limitation to exercise. We sought to investigate the peripheral limitations to exercise in these 2 phenotypes using single‐leg knee extension (SLKE) exercise, a modality that reduces the central limitations to exercise. Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that patients with the Type B phenotype would have lower leg VO 2peak secondary to insufficient oxygen extraction (i.e., lower ∆a‐vO 2diff ) when compared to patients with the Type A phenotype. Methods We studied 20 HFpEF patients with either the Type A (n = 8; 68 ± 2yr; 5F) or Type B (n = 12; 70 ± 2yr; 7F) phenotype. Participants performed an incremental SLKE peak exercise test on a custom ergometer. Leg blood flow (LBF) was measured at the common femoral artery using duplex Doppler ultrasound. Average LBF (ml/min) at each workload was determined from measured blood velocity and vessel diameter. a‐vO 2diff was calculated from hemoglobin and venous oxygen saturation directly from a femoral venous catheter, and arterial oxygen saturation via pulse oximetry. Leg VO 2 (ml/min) was determined as the product of LBF and a‐vO 2diff . All data are presented as mean ± SEM. Results Participants with the Type A “central” phenotype reached a peak exercise workload of 20 ± 4 W and those with the Type B “peripheral” phenotype reached 15 ± 2 W (p = 0.18). Leg VO 2peak was not different between the two phenotypes (Type A: 215 ± 23; Type B: 253 ± 34 ml/min; p = 0.42). The peak increase in LBF was ~ 50% greater in Type B (+1940 ± 243 ml/min) than Type A (+1309 ± 161 ml/min) patients, though this response was more variable (p = 0.07). Additionally, the ∆a‐vO 2diff from rest to peak exercise was significantly lower in those with the Type B phenotype (Type A: +7.17 ± 0.87; Type B: +4.63 ± 0.46 ml O 2 /dl blood; p = 0.01). Finally, the ∆LBF/∆VO 2 slope was lower in patients with the Type A phenotype (Type A: 6.78 ± 0.55; Type B: 8.72 ± 0.43; p = 0.01). Conclusion Contrary to our hypothesis, there was no difference in leg VO 2peak between phenotypes. Patients with Type B HFpEF had greater limitations in skeletal muscle oxygen extraction during exercise as evidenced by their diminished ability to increase a‐vO 2diff during incremental SLKE, similar to the observed a‐vO 2diff extraction impairments during whole body exercise. Importantly, by phenotyping HFpEF patients based on their limitations to exercise, we may be able to better individualize treatment strategies to improve exercise tolerance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".