Biomedical subjects

Eliezer Klainman

Publications and source records attributed to Eliezer Klainman.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

The prognostic value of post-exercise blood pressure reduction in patients with hypertensive response during exercise stress test.

BACKGROUND: Hypertensive response at peak-exercise and during the recovery phase of exercise stress test (ET) is associated with poor cardiovascular prognosis. We investigated whether decrease in blood pressure (BP) from peak to post-exercise would identify a subgroup at higher cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Eighty-six non-hypertensive patients (0-4 cardiovascular risk factors) with hypertensive reaction at peak-ET (systolic>180 mm Hg and/or diastolic>100 mm Hg) were divided based on BP 5 min after exercise termination into two groups: Normal response (NrmR) (<160/90 mm Hg), Hypertensive response (HypR) (>/=160/90 mm Hg). Five years later the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality was assessed for each group. RESULTS: Both groups had similar pre- and peak-exercise BP. However the HypR group had higher post-exercise BP (systolic: 163+/-13 vs. 125+/-14 mm Hg, respectively, p<0.01, and diastolic: 74+/-6 vs. 75+/-4 mm Hg, respectively, p<0.01), smaller decrease in BP after exercise (Delta systolic: 46.9+/-3.1 vs. 73.9+/-3.6 mm Hg, respectively, p<0.01, Delta diastolic: 12.4+/-1.5 vs. 26.5+/-2.2 mm Hg, respectively, p<0.01), and higher post- than pre-exercise BP (Delta systolic: 24.5+/-3.5 vs. -6+/-4.1 mm Hg, respectively, p<0.01, A diastolic: 19+/-2.1 vs. -13+/-2.3 mm Hg, respectively, p<0.01). Five years later, HypR group had higher prevalence of abnormal cholesterol serum level (p<0.01), hypertension (p<0.01) and combined ischemic heart disease and cerebrovascular disease (RR 1.32, 95% CI=1.13-1.54, p<0.01). CONCLUSION: During ET evaluation, it is important to evaluate the BP at 5 min after exercise because reduced BP drop, at this routinely measured point, identifies a subgroup with higher cardiovascular risk.

Aged↗

PubMed2002

Functional evaluation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: pulmonary function test versus cardiopulmonary exercise test.

The pulmonary function test (PFT) alone may be inadequate for predicting work-related exercise capacity in patients who file workers' compensation claims for respiratory limitation and compensation. Two hundred sixteen ambulatory patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (forced expiratory volume in 1 second = 54.1 +/- 16.8% predicted) were administered the PFT and cardiopulmonary exercise test, and the results were analyzed by categorical statistical comparison, based on standard medical impairment classifications. Sixty-five patients (30.1%) were similarly classified by the two methods. Of the remaining patients, 132 (61.1%) were found to be less impaired according to the cardiopulmonary exercise test than according to the PFT, and 19 (8.8%) were more impaired according to the PFT. The results favor the use of the cardiopulmonary exercise test for the routine evaluation of respiratory impairment in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, particularly for patients with mild or moderate impairment revealed by the PFT. The large discrepancy between the two procedures emphasizes the need for a novel approach.

Aged↗

PubMed2002

The relationship between left ventricular function assessed by multigated radionuclide test and cardiopulmonary exercise test in patients with ischemic heart disease.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare the oxygen pulse curve (O(2)P-C) as measured during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) with left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) rest-exercise response as measured by multigated equilibrium (99m)Tc radionuclide cineangiography (MUGA) in patients with different degrees of ischemic heart disease (IHD). PATIENTS: Forty-six patients (39 men and 7 women; mean plus minus 1 SD age, 59.2 plus minus 11 years) with IHD, with no hypertrophic, valvular, or pericardial disease. METHODS: A supine bicycle ergometer with increments of 25 W every 2 min was used for MUGA, and an electronically braked cycle ergometer was used for upright symptoms-limited CPET. Exercise was increased by 10 to 20 W/min until the target heart rate (HR) was reached (similar peak HR for both studies). MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The O(2)P-C was scored on a 10-point scale as follows: type A, normal curve (10 points); type B, normal-shaped curve with low values (8 points); type C, low and flat curve (5 points); type D, descending curve (3 points). Findings for the MUGA study were classified into four groups by the degree of ischemic response: group 1 (control), normal diastolic function (n = 10), LVEF > 55%, LVEF during exercise minus LVEF at rest [DeltaLVEF] greater-than-or-equal 5%; group 2, mild ischemia (n = 10), LVEF > 55%, < 0 DeltaLVEF < 5%, diastolic dysfunction at exercise (prominent "A" waves); group 3, LV dysfunction (n = 9), LVEF < or = 35% at rest; and group 4, significant ischemia (n = 17), LVEF > 55%, DeltaLVEF < 0, diastolic dysfunction. A highly significant relationship between the O(2)P-C score and the MUGA grouping was observed by Fisher's Exact Test and Pearson's linear regression line (p < 0.001; R = - 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Exercise-responded O(2)P-C might serve as a good noninvasive, physiologically based, parameter to distinguish between IHD patients with normal and impaired LV function.

Adult↗