Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing after Surgical Repair of Tetralogy of Fallot—Does Modality Matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite a successful repair of tetralogy of Fallot (rToF) in childhood, residual lesions are common and can contribute to impaired exercise capacity. Although both cycle ergometer and treadmill protocols are often used interchangeably these approaches have not been directly compared. In this study we examined cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) measurements in rToF. Methods: Inclusion criteria were clinically stable rToF patients able to perform a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and two CPET studies, one on the treadmill (incremental Bruce protocol) and one on the cycle ergometer (ramped protocol), within 12 months. Demographic, surgical and clinical data; functional class; QRS duration; CMR measures; CPET data and international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ) scores of patients were collected. Results: Fifty-seven patients were enrolled (53% male, 20.5 ± 7.8 years at CPET). CMR measurements included a right ventricle (RV) end-diastolic volume index of 119 ± 22 mL/m2, a RV ejection fraction (EF) of 55 ± 6% and a left ventricular (LV) EF of 56 ± 5%. Peak oxygen consumption (VO2)/Kg (25.5 ± 5.5 vs. 31.7 ± 6.9; p < 0.0001), VO2 at anaerobic threshold (AT) (15.3 ± 3.9 vs. 22.0 ± 4.5; p < 0.0001), peak O2 pulse (10.6 ± 3.0 vs. 12.1± 3.4; p = 0.0061) and oxygen uptake efficiency slope (OUES) (1932.2 ± 623.6 vs. 2292.0 ± 639.4; p < 0.001) were significantly lower on the cycle ergometer compared with the treadmill, differently from ventilatory efficiency (VE/VCO2) max which was significantly higher on the cycle ergometer (32.2 ± 4.5 vs. 30.4 ± 5.4; p < 0.001). Only the VE/VCO2 slope at the respiratory compensation point (RCP) was similar between the two methodologies (p = 0.150). Conclusions: The majority of CPET measurements differed according to the modality of testing, with the exception being the VE/VCO2 slope at RCP. Our data suggest that CPET parameters should be interpreted according to test type; however, these findings should be validated in larger populations and in a variety of institutions.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".