ABSTRACT
The determination of precise exercise intensity is essential for effective exercise rehabilitation. The Borg rating of perceived exertion category ratio (CR) scale is utilized to prescribe an appropriate level of exertion intensity. A Borg CR of approximately 13 coincides with the ventilatory aerobic threshold (VAT). Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) exhibit various symptoms. We hypothesized that the workload at Borg CR13 (Borg CR13-Watt) differs from the workload at the VAT level (VAT-Watt) in AF patients with restored sinus rhythm (SR) following ablation. Accordingly, the relationship between Borg CR13-Watt and VAT-Watt was studied in patients with restored SR. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) was performed at 101±88 days after ablation in 150 patients using a bicycle ergometer. No adverse events were observed during CPET. Borg CR13-Watt was significantly higher than VAT-Watt (67.2±27.8 Watt vs. 54.7±17.6 Watt, P<0.0001). Borg CR13-Watt showed significant linear regression with VAT-Watt (regression coefficient, 0.49, P<0.01; correlation coefficient, 0.80, P<0.01). Higher Borg CR13-Watt was associated with greater differences between Borg CR13-Watt and VAT-Watt (ΔWatt). The Bland-Altman plot showed nonconcordance between the two. Male sex, use of antiarrhythmic drugs, and smoking had contributed to the increased ΔWatt. Duration from ablation to time of CPET did not correlate with ΔWatt. Therefore, Borg CR13-Watt did not coincide with VAT-Watt in patients with restored SR. Higher Borg CR13-Watt was associated with greater ΔWatt. Prescribing exertion intensity as determined solely by perceived exertion is inadequate. CPET is required to determine the precise exercise intensity in AF patients with restored SR after ablation.
ABSTRACT
Prompt prescription and early initiation of exercise training are essential for patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We hypothesized that cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) parameters determined the day after elective PCI during hospitalization would not differ from those obtained 1-3 weeks post-PCI in patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD). CPET was performed the day after and 1-3 weeks (13±4.6; 7-21 days) after PCI. CPET was performed with a bicycle ergometer up to the ventilatory aerobic threshold (VAT) on the day after PCI. Symptom-limited CPET was conducted 1-3 weeks after PCI. No complications arose from the tests. There were no significant differences in %VAT (next day: 88.6±16.7 vs. 1-3 weeks later: 91.4%±18.7%), the workload at the VAT (51.8±11.0 W vs. 52.9± 11.6 W), heart rate (HR) at the VAT (95.3±105 beats/min vs. 94.1±11.3 beats/min), or metabolic equivalent (METs) at the VAT (3.69±0.69 vs. 3.84±0.78) between the two sessions. The slope of linear regression for two repeated measurements was close to 1 (%VAT, 1.02; workload at the VAT, 0.95; METs at the VAT, 1.03), except for HR (0.70). Bland-Altman plots revealed the reproducibility of all four CPET measurements between the two sessions. In conclusion, CPET up to the VAT can be performed safely 1-day post-PCI in patients with stable CHD. CPET parameters do not significantly differ between testing performed the day after and 1-3 weeks after PCI. Next-day CPET during hospitalization after PCI may enable prompt exercise prescription without the need for another CPET 1-3 weeks later.
