Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33992064›Full record

SynthesisCurrent cardiology reviews2021

Safety and Efficacy of Intermittent Hypoxia Conditioning as a New Rehabilitation/ Secondary Prevention Strategy for Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Oleg S Glazachev, Svetlana Yu Kryzhanovskaya, Maxim A Zapara, Elena N Dudnik, Vlada G Samartseva, Davide Susta

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current cardiology reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Oleg S GlazachevDepartment of Normal Physiology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
Svetlana Yu KryzhanovskayaDepartment of Normal Physiology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
Maxim A ZaparaDepartment of Normal Physiology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
Elena N DudnikDepartment of Normal Physiology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
Vlada G SamartsevaDepartment of Normal Physiology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia.
Davide SustaSchool of Health and Human Performance, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Sechenov University · RUDublin City University · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOnce used by mountaineers to facilitate rapid adaptations to altitude and by athletes to improve their aerobic capacity, exposure to hypoxia has been proven to affect various physiological, clinically relevant parameters. A form of conditioning known as Intermittent Hypoxia Conditioning (IHC) consists of repeated exposures to intermittent hypoxia, combined with normoxia and hyperoxia, which has been shown to have potential as a treatment to improve cardio- metabolic risks profile in cardiac patients but results across studies are inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of IHC.

methodsFour electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched (from inception to December 2019) to retrieve all studies focused on IHC in elderly patients with cardiovascular disease. A meta-analysis of functional, efficacy and safety outcomes in cardiac patients was completed to compare IHC to sham treatments.

resultsFourteen studies with 320 patients in the Interval Hypoxia-normoxia Group (IHNG) or Interval Hypoxia-hyperoxia training Group (IHHG) and 111 patients in the control group were included in our meta-analysis. IHNT and IHHT were associated with significant reduction in heart rate, SBP, and DBP at rest after treatment [MD= -5.35 beat/min, 95% CI (-9.19 to -1.50), p=0.006], [MD= -13.72 mmHg, 95% CI (-18.31 to -9.132), p<0.001], and [MD= -7.882 mmHg, 95% CI (-13.163 to -2.601), p=0.003], respectively. There were no significant complications or serious adverse events related to IHNT/IHHT.

conclusionThe current evidence suggested that the use of the IHNT/IHHT program in elderly patients with CVDs can be safe and effective in terms of heart rate and elevated blood pressure. However, currently, there is no supporting evidence that IHNT/IHHT can significantly improve hematological parameters or lipid profile. Exercise tolerance increased at the end of the course of hypoxic conditioning within IHC group, but did not differ from controls. Further research is needed.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesAdaptation, PhysiologicalAgedExercise ToleranceHumansHypoxiaSecondary Preventioncardiovascular diseases.Co-morbid cardiac patientsexercise tolerancehypertensionintermittent hypoxic conditioninginterval hypoxia-normoxia/hyperoxia training

Identifiers

PMID33992064
PMCPMC8950503
OpenAlexW3161483257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.