BackgroundFrailty is identified as a major predictor of adverse outcomes in older surgical patients. However, the outcomes in pre-frail patients after cardiovascular surgery remain unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate the main outcomes (length of stay, mechanical ventilation time, stroke and in-hospital death) in pre-frail patients in comparison with no-frail patients after cardiovascular surgery.Methods221 patients over 65 years old, with established diagnosis of myocardial infarction or valve disease were enrolled. Patients were evaluated by Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) before surgery and allocated into 2 groups: no-frailty (CFS 1~3) vs. pre-frailty (CFS 4) and followed up for main outcomes. For all analysis, the statistical significance was set at 5% (p < 0.05).ResultsNo differences were found in anthropometric and demographic data between groups (p > 0.05). Pre-frail patients showed a longer mechanical ventilation time (193 ± 37 vs. 29 ± 7 hours; p<0.05) than no-frail patients; similar results were observed for length of stay at the intensive care unit (5 ± 1 vs. 3 ± 1 days; p < 0.05) and total time of hospitalization (12 ± 5 vs. 9 ± 3 days; p < 0.05). In addition, the pre-frail group had a higher number of adverse events (stroke 8.3% vs. 3.9%; in-hospital death 21.5% vs. 7.8%; p < 0.05) with an increased risk for development stroke (OR: 2.139, 95% CI: 0.622-7.351, p = 0.001; HR: 2.763, 95%CI: 1.206-6.331, p = 0.0001) and in-hospital death (OR: 1.809, 95% CI: 1.286-2.546, p = 0.001; HR: 1.830, 95% CI: 1.476-2.269, p = 0.0001). Moreover, higher number of pre-frail patients required homecare services than no-frail patients (46.5% vs. 0%; p < 0.05).ConclusionPatients with pre-frailty showed longer mechanical ventilation time and hospital stay with an increased risk for cardiovascular events compared with no-frail patients.

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, registration number: NCT002289625.

BackgroundExercise training (ET) improves functional capacity in chronic heart failure (HF). However, ET effects in acute HF are unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of ET alone or combined with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) compared with standard medical treatment during hospitalization in acute HF patients.MethodsTwenty-nine patients (systolic HF) were randomized into three groups: control (Control - only standard medical treatment); ET with placebo NIV (ET+Sham) and ET+NIV (NIV with 14 and 8 cmH2O of inspiratory and expiratory pressure, respectively). The 6MWT was performed on day 1 and day 10 of hospitalization and the ET was performed on an unloaded cycle ergometer until patients' tolerance limit (20 min or less) for eight consecutive days. For all analyses, statistical significance was set at 5% (p < 0.05).ResultsNone of the patients in either exercise groups had adverse events or required exercise interruption. The 6MWT distance was greater in ET+NIV (Δ120 ± 72 m) than in ET+Sham (Δ73 ± 26 m) and Control (Δ45 ± 32 m; p < 0.05). Total exercise time was greater (128 ± 10 vs. 92 ± 8 min; p < 0.05) and dyspnea was lower (3 ± 1 vs. 4 ± 1; p < 0.05) in ET+NIV than ET+Sham. The ET+NIV group had a shorter hospital stay (17 ± 10 days) than ET+Sham (23 ± 8 days) and Control (39 ± 15 days) groups (p < 0.05). Total exercise time in ET+Sham and ET+NIV had significant correlation with length of hospital stay (r = -0.75; p = 0.01).ConclusionExercise training in acute HF was safe, had no adverse events and, when combined with NIV, improved 6MWT and reduce dyspnea and length of stay.

BackgroundExercise is essential for patients with heart failure as it leads to a reduction in morbidity and mortality as well as improved functional capacity and oxygen uptake (⩒O2). However, the need for an experienced physiologist and the cost of the exam may render the cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) unfeasible. Thus, the six-minute walk test (6MWT) and step test (ST) may be alternatives for exercise prescription.ObjectiveThe aim was to correlate heart rate (HR) during the 6MWT and ST with HR at the anaerobic threshold (HRAT) and peak HR (HRP) obtained on the CPET.MethodsEighty-three patients (58 ± 11 years) with heart failure (NYHA class II) were included and all subjects had optimized medication for at least 3 months. Evaluations involved CPET (⩒O2, HRAT, HRP), 6MWT (HR6MWT) and ST (HRST).ResultsThe participants exhibited severe ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction: 31 ± 7%) and low peak ⩒O2 (15.2 ± 3.1 mL.kg-1.min-1). HRP (113 ± 19 bpm) was higher than HRAT (92 ± 14 bpm; p < 0.05) and HR6MWT (94 ± 13 bpm; p < 0.05). No significant difference was found between HRP and HRST. Moreover, a strong correlation was found between HRAT and HR6MWT (r = 0.81; p < 0.0001), and between HRP and HRST (r = 0.89; p < 0.0001).ConclusionThese findings suggest that, in the absence of CPET, exercise prescription can be performed by use of 6MWT and ST, based on HR6MWT and HRST

No abstract