Physiological dead space and arterial carbon dioxide contributions to exercise ventilatory inefficiency in patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction heart failure

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction demonstrate an increased ventilatory equivalent for carbon dioxide (V˙E/V˙CO2) slope. The physiological correlates of the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope remain unclear in the two HF phenotypes. We hypothesized that changes in the physiological dead space to tidal volume ratio (VD/VT) and arterial CO2 tension (PaCO2) differentially contribute to the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF vs. HFpEF. Methods and results: Adults with HFrEF (n=32) and HFpEF (n=27) [mean±standard deviation (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction: 22±7% and 61±9%, respectively; mean±SD body mass index: 28±4kg/m2 and 33±6kg/m2, respectively; P<0.01] performed cardiopulmonary exercise testing with breath-by-breath ventilation and gas exchange measurements. PaCO2 was measured via radial arterial catheterization. We calculated the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope via linear regression, and VD/VT=1-[(863 × V˙CO2)/(V˙E×PaCO2)]. Resting VD/VT (0.48±0.08 vs. 0.41±0.11; P=0.04), but not PaCO2 (38±5mmHg vs. 40±3mmHg; P=0.21) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. Peak exercise VD/VT (0.39±0.08 vs. 0.32±0.12; P=0.02) and PaCO2 (33±6mmHg vs. 38±4mmHg; P<0.01) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. The V˙E/V˙CO2 slope was higher in HFrEF compared with HFpEF (44±11 vs. 35±8; P<0.01). Variance associated with the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF and HFpEF was explained by peak exercise VD/VT (R2=0.30 and R2=0.50, respectively) and PaCO2 (R2=0.64 and R2=0.28, respectively), but the relative contributions of each differed (all P<0.01). Conclusions: Relationships between the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope and both VD/VT and PaCO2 are robust, but differ between HFpEF and HFrEF. Increasing V˙E/V˙CO2 slope appears to be strongly explained by mechanisms influential in regulating PaCO2 in HFrEF, which contrasts with the strong role of increased VD/VT in HFpEF.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEuropean Journal of Heart Failure
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2017

Fingerprint

Carbon Dioxide
Heart Failure
Exercise
Tidal Volume
Catheterization
Stroke Volume
Ventilation
Linear Models
Arterial Pressure
Body Mass Index
Gases
Phenotype

Keywords

  • Cardiopulmonary exercise testing
  • Exercise capacity
  • Exercise intolerance
  • Exercise tolerance
  • Exercise ventilatory efficiency
  • Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{ce00e349b974406cb337819a457562d6,
title = "Physiological dead space and arterial carbon dioxide contributions to exercise ventilatory inefficiency in patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction heart failure",
abstract = "Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction demonstrate an increased ventilatory equivalent for carbon dioxide (V˙E/V˙CO2) slope. The physiological correlates of the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope remain unclear in the two HF phenotypes. We hypothesized that changes in the physiological dead space to tidal volume ratio (VD/VT) and arterial CO2 tension (PaCO2) differentially contribute to the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF vs. HFpEF. Methods and results: Adults with HFrEF (n=32) and HFpEF (n=27) [mean±standard deviation (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction: 22±7{\%} and 61±9{\%}, respectively; mean±SD body mass index: 28±4kg/m2 and 33±6kg/m2, respectively; P<0.01] performed cardiopulmonary exercise testing with breath-by-breath ventilation and gas exchange measurements. PaCO2 was measured via radial arterial catheterization. We calculated the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope via linear regression, and VD/VT=1-[(863 × V˙CO2)/(V˙E×PaCO2)]. Resting VD/VT (0.48±0.08 vs. 0.41±0.11; P=0.04), but not PaCO2 (38±5mmHg vs. 40±3mmHg; P=0.21) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. Peak exercise VD/VT (0.39±0.08 vs. 0.32±0.12; P=0.02) and PaCO2 (33±6mmHg vs. 38±4mmHg; P<0.01) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. The V˙E/V˙CO2 slope was higher in HFrEF compared with HFpEF (44±11 vs. 35±8; P<0.01). Variance associated with the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF and HFpEF was explained by peak exercise VD/VT (R2=0.30 and R2=0.50, respectively) and PaCO2 (R2=0.64 and R2=0.28, respectively), but the relative contributions of each differed (all P<0.01). Conclusions: Relationships between the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope and both VD/VT and PaCO2 are robust, but differ between HFpEF and HFrEF. Increasing V˙E/V˙CO2 slope appears to be strongly explained by mechanisms influential in regulating PaCO2 in HFrEF, which contrasts with the strong role of increased VD/VT in HFpEF.",
keywords = "Cardiopulmonary exercise testing, Exercise capacity, Exercise intolerance, Exercise tolerance, Exercise ventilatory efficiency, Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction",
author = "{Van Iterson}, {Erik H.} and Johnson, {Bruce David} and Borlaug, {Barry A} and Olson, {Thomas P}",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1002/ejhf.913",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "European Journal of Heart Failure",
issn = "1388-9842",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Physiological dead space and arterial carbon dioxide contributions to exercise ventilatory inefficiency in patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction heart failure

AU - Van Iterson, Erik H.

AU - Johnson, Bruce David

AU - Borlaug, Barry A

AU - Olson, Thomas P

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction demonstrate an increased ventilatory equivalent for carbon dioxide (V˙E/V˙CO2) slope. The physiological correlates of the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope remain unclear in the two HF phenotypes. We hypothesized that changes in the physiological dead space to tidal volume ratio (VD/VT) and arterial CO2 tension (PaCO2) differentially contribute to the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF vs. HFpEF. Methods and results: Adults with HFrEF (n=32) and HFpEF (n=27) [mean±standard deviation (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction: 22±7% and 61±9%, respectively; mean±SD body mass index: 28±4kg/m2 and 33±6kg/m2, respectively; P<0.01] performed cardiopulmonary exercise testing with breath-by-breath ventilation and gas exchange measurements. PaCO2 was measured via radial arterial catheterization. We calculated the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope via linear regression, and VD/VT=1-[(863 × V˙CO2)/(V˙E×PaCO2)]. Resting VD/VT (0.48±0.08 vs. 0.41±0.11; P=0.04), but not PaCO2 (38±5mmHg vs. 40±3mmHg; P=0.21) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. Peak exercise VD/VT (0.39±0.08 vs. 0.32±0.12; P=0.02) and PaCO2 (33±6mmHg vs. 38±4mmHg; P<0.01) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. The V˙E/V˙CO2 slope was higher in HFrEF compared with HFpEF (44±11 vs. 35±8; P<0.01). Variance associated with the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF and HFpEF was explained by peak exercise VD/VT (R2=0.30 and R2=0.50, respectively) and PaCO2 (R2=0.64 and R2=0.28, respectively), but the relative contributions of each differed (all P<0.01). Conclusions: Relationships between the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope and both VD/VT and PaCO2 are robust, but differ between HFpEF and HFrEF. Increasing V˙E/V˙CO2 slope appears to be strongly explained by mechanisms influential in regulating PaCO2 in HFrEF, which contrasts with the strong role of increased VD/VT in HFpEF.

AB - Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction demonstrate an increased ventilatory equivalent for carbon dioxide (V˙E/V˙CO2) slope. The physiological correlates of the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope remain unclear in the two HF phenotypes. We hypothesized that changes in the physiological dead space to tidal volume ratio (VD/VT) and arterial CO2 tension (PaCO2) differentially contribute to the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF vs. HFpEF. Methods and results: Adults with HFrEF (n=32) and HFpEF (n=27) [mean±standard deviation (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction: 22±7% and 61±9%, respectively; mean±SD body mass index: 28±4kg/m2 and 33±6kg/m2, respectively; P<0.01] performed cardiopulmonary exercise testing with breath-by-breath ventilation and gas exchange measurements. PaCO2 was measured via radial arterial catheterization. We calculated the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope via linear regression, and VD/VT=1-[(863 × V˙CO2)/(V˙E×PaCO2)]. Resting VD/VT (0.48±0.08 vs. 0.41±0.11; P=0.04), but not PaCO2 (38±5mmHg vs. 40±3mmHg; P=0.21) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. Peak exercise VD/VT (0.39±0.08 vs. 0.32±0.12; P=0.02) and PaCO2 (33±6mmHg vs. 38±4mmHg; P<0.01) differed between HFrEF and HFpEF. The V˙E/V˙CO2 slope was higher in HFrEF compared with HFpEF (44±11 vs. 35±8; P<0.01). Variance associated with the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope in HFrEF and HFpEF was explained by peak exercise VD/VT (R2=0.30 and R2=0.50, respectively) and PaCO2 (R2=0.64 and R2=0.28, respectively), but the relative contributions of each differed (all P<0.01). Conclusions: Relationships between the V˙E/V˙CO2 slope and both VD/VT and PaCO2 are robust, but differ between HFpEF and HFrEF. Increasing V˙E/V˙CO2 slope appears to be strongly explained by mechanisms influential in regulating PaCO2 in HFrEF, which contrasts with the strong role of increased VD/VT in HFpEF.

KW - Cardiopulmonary exercise testing

KW - Exercise capacity

KW - Exercise intolerance

KW - Exercise tolerance

KW - Exercise ventilatory efficiency

KW - Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030696331&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85030696331&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ejhf.913

DO - 10.1002/ejhf.913

M3 - Article

JO - European Journal of Heart Failure

JF - European Journal of Heart Failure

SN - 1388-9842

ER -