Effects of intermittent hypoxic–hyperoxic training on exercise tolerance, cognitive function, and arterial stiffness in older patients with myocardial infarction and chronic heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the treatment of myocardial infarction, it remains one of the leading causes of the development of heart failure. Cardiac rehabilitation is aimed at minimizing the time required for recovery of physical, social, and psychological functioning after a cardiac event. One of the promising rehabilitation strategies for patients after myocardial infarction is the use of intermittent hypoxic–hyperoxic training (IHHT). AIM: To evaluate the effect of IHHT, added to a standard rehabilitation program, on exercise tolerance, NT-proBNP levels, arterial stiffness parameters, and cognitive function in older patients with myocardial infarction at the second inpatient stage of rehabilitation and chronic heart failure. METHODS: A single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind study with parallel groups was conducted. A total of 102 patients were enrolled and randomized into two groups: the main group (n = 51) received standard rehabilitation combined with IHHT using the ReOxy device, whereas the control group (n = 51) received standard rehabilitation only. The IHHT course consisted of 10 daily sessions (5 sessions per week for 2 weeks), each lasting 40 minutes. The primary endpoint was the change in six-minute walk test distance. Secondary endpoints included changes in NT-proBNP concentration, cognitive function assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and arterial stiffness evaluated by the cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) using the VaSera VS-1500N system. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 8. RESULTS: The groups were comparable in baseline clinical and demographic characteristics (p 0.05). The addition of IHHT to the rehabilitation program resulted in a significantly greater increase in six-minute walk distance compared with standard rehabilitation alone (51.0 [33.0; 86.0] m vs 30.0 [22.5; 56.0] m, p = 0.0001), as well as a greater reduction in NT-proBNP levels (250.7 [115.7; 564.1] vs 192.9 [109.45; 290.5], p = 0.0243). The IHHT group also demonstrated a more pronounced improvement in cognitive function according to the MoCA score (3.0 [2.0; 4.5] points vs 2.0 [1.0; 3.0] points, p = 0.0005). A trend toward a greater reduction in the right cardio-ankle vascular index (R-CAVI) was observed in the IHHT group compared with controls (Δ −0.5 [0.0; 1.1] vs Δ −0.2 [0.0; 0.7], p = 0.05). No significant between-group differences were found for left CAVI (L-CAVI) or ankle–brachial index. CONCLUSION: The addition of IHHT to standard rehabilitation in patients with myocardial infarction and chronic heart failure improves exercise tolerance and cognitive function.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".