ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2024
Comparable Ventilatory Inefficiency at Maximal and Submaximal Performance in COPD vs. CHF subjects: An Innovative Approach.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- CPET Characteristics in HFrEF, HFpEF and COPD.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Ventilatory Efficiency: Is This the Key to Unlock the Full Potential of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing?Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, excess ventilation has been grounded under the relationship between minute-ventilation/carbon dioxide output ( V ˙ E - V ˙ CO 2 ). Alternatively, a new approach for ventilatory efficiency ( η E V ˙ ) has been published.
objectiveOur main hypothesis is that comparatively low levels of η E V ˙ between chronic heart failure (CHF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are attainable for a similar level of maximum and submaximal aerobic performance, conversely to long-established methods ( V ˙ E - V ˙ CO 2 slope and intercept).
methodsBoth groups performed lung function tests, echocardiography, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. The significance level adopted in the statistical analysis was 5%. Thus, nineteen COPD and nineteen CHF-eligible subjects completed the study. With the aim of contrasting full values of V ˙ E - V ˙ CO 2 and η V ˙ E for the exercise period (100%), correlations were made with smaller fractions, such as 90% and 75% of the maximum values.
resultsThe two groups attained matched characteristics for age (62±6 vs. 59±9 yrs, p>.05), sex (10/9 vs. 14/5, p>0.05), BMI (26±4 vs. 27±3 Kg m2, p>0.05), and peak V ˙ O 2 (72±19 vs. 74±20 %pred, p>0.05), respectively. The V ˙ E - V ˙ CO 2 slope and intercept were significantly different for COPD and CHF (27.2±1.4 vs. 33.1±5.7 and 5.3±1.9 vs. 1.7±3.6, p<0.05 for both), but η V ˙ E average values were similar between-groups (10.2±3.4 vs. 10.9±2.3%, p=0.462). The correlations between 100% of the exercise period with 90% and 75% of it were stronger for η V ˙ E (r>0.850 for both).
conclusionThe η V ˙ E is a valuable method for comparison between cardiopulmonary diseases, with so far distinct physiopathological mechanisms, including ventilatory constraints in COPD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.