• Pacing Clin Electrophysiol · Nov 2000

    Comparative Study Clinical Trial

    Comparison of metabolic expenditure during CAEP versus a test adapted to aerobic capacity (Harbor test) in elderly healthy individuals.

    • E Page, J L Bonnet, and C Durand.
    • UCP.X, 45, Marie Reynoard Ave., 38100 Grenoble, France.
    • Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2000 Nov 1;23(11 Pt 2):1772-7.

    AbstractCardiopulmonary exercise tests are frequently used to test rate responsive pacemakers. The chronotropic assessment exercise protocol (CAEP) has been specifically proposed for the evaluation of rate responsive pacing systems. A mathematical method, based on CAEP measurements, was developed with a view of normalizing the exercise induced metabolic response. CAEP was compared to a tailored protocol (Harbor), adapted to the metabolic capacity of each patient. Harbor was set to keep the exercise duration within 10 minutes and achieve a workload as linear as possible. Metabolic parameters were continuously recorded by a cardiopulmonary system. Those data were used in the construction of slopes by the normalization method. The results of the tests performed in 16 elderly healthy patients showed no differences in metabolic or functional parameters. Slopes of the mathematical model were comparable (1.09 +/- 0.16 for CAEP vs 1.07 +/- 0.17 for Harbor), though both were higher than the value of 1, defined as normal. In both cases, linearity was confirmed by the coefficient of correlation (0.98 +/- 0.02 for CAEP and Harbor). In conclusion, no significant differences were found in the outcomes of the two protocols. Higher values of the slopes with the normalization method can be explained by the definition of the maximal predicted heart rate as 220--age, which is probably not appropriate for elderly, healthy, active subjects.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…