MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399677523 · doi:10.1093/eurjpc/zwae175.449

Cardiovascular mechanisms of exercise intolerance in individuals with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4399677523 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuelle Germain, Stephen Foulkes, D. Hewitt, Jianlong Wang, Erin J. Howden, Michael D. Nelson, Guido Claessen, André La Gerche, Mark J. Haykowsky

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Preventive Cardiology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSupine positionCardiologyHemodynamicsInternal medicineMeta-analysisConfidence intervalExercise intolerancePulmonary hypertensionPhysical therapyHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Reduced exercise tolerance – measured as decreased peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2) – is a hallmark feature of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). However, the mechanisms underlying decreased peak VO2 in individuals with CTEPH are unclear. Purpose To evaluate the degree of impairment in peak VO2 and its underlying mechanisms in individuals with CTEPH versus healthy controls (CON). Methods A systematic search was conducted using PubMed (January 1993 to May 2023) for studies evaluating peak VO2 with or without additional evaluation of exercise hemodynamics in individuals with CTEPH and healthy controls. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: 1a) evaluation of peak VO2 from maximal cardiopulmonary testing with or without additional evaluation of exercise hemodynamics; 2) individuals with confirmed CTEPH; 3) ≥18 years of age 4) inclusion of a non-CTEPH healthy control group. A meta-analysis of included studies was performed, with values for CTEPH and CON compared using a fixed-effects model. Results (CTEPH vs CON) are reported as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI), with heterogeneity assessed using the I2 statistic. Results Of 286 studies identified in the initial search, nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, encompassing 189 individuals with CTEPH (mean age: 57 yrs) and 115 CON (mean age: 47 yrs). Peak VO2 was assessed during upright exercise in 8 studies, whilst hemodynamic assessments were performed during semi-supine exercise echocardiography in one study, or supine exercise cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in six studies. Peak VO2 (Figure 1A) was significantly lower in CTEPH vs CON (WMD: -13.8 mL/kg/min, 95% CI: -15.0 to -12.6; I2: 93%). This coincided with decreased maximal heart rate assessed during upright (WMD: -26 b/min, 95% CI: -31 to -21; I2: 81%) or supine exercise (WMD: -25 b/min, 95% CI: -28 to -21; I2: 0%), and a lower supine peak exercise stroke volume index (WMD: -25 mL/m2, 95% CI: -30 to -20; I2: 0%), resulting in a decreased supine peak cardiac index (WMD: -4.05 L/min/m2, 95% CI: 4.53 to -3.56; I2: 62%). Individuals with CTEPH also demonstrated substantial reduction in peak exercise right (RVEF, Figure 1B - WMD: -37.7%, 95% CI: -39.8 to -35.6; I2: 0%) and left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, Figure 1C - WMD: -4.0%, 95% CI: -6.2 to -1.8; I2: 0%). In CTEPH, the average peak exercise RVEF was 34% lower than LVEF, indicative of adverse biventricular interaction that may be mediated by the exaggerated mean peak pulmonary artery pressures during exercise (+43 mmHg, 95% CI: 40 to 46; I2: 0%). Conclusion CTEPH is associated with a severely marked impairment in peak VO2 that is secondary to multifactorial impairments in cardiovascular function. This highlights the need for tailored, multi-component therapies aimed at addressing the complex pathophysiology driving exercise intolerance in CTEPH.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.008
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Preventive CardiologySame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207