Key result
Low heart rate recovery and metabolic equivalents increased cardiovascular death risk versus high HRR/METs in women (HR 8.51, 95% CI 3.65-19.84) and men (HR 3.53, 95% CI 2.03-6.15).
Why the study?
Does the addition of exercise capacity and heart rate recovery to Framingham Risk Scores improve risk prediction for cardiovascular death in asymptomatic individuals?
Cohort (n=6,126)
Does the addition of exercise capacity and heart rate recovery to Framingham Risk Scores improve risk prediction for cardiovascular death in asymptomatic individuals?
Effect estimate: HR 8.51 (women), HR 3.53 (men) (95% CI 3.65-19.84 (women), 2.03-6.15 (men))
p-value: p=<0.001
The addition of exercise capacity and heart rate recovery from treadmill testing to Framingham Risk Scores significantly improves the prediction of cardiovascular death in asymptomatic individuals.
Low HRR/METs associated with higher CV death risk; hypothesis-generating for adding treadmill metrics to Framingham scores.
BACKGROUND: National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines recommend the use of Framingham risk scores (FRS) for cardiovascular assessment of asymptomatic individuals. We hypothesized that risk prediction could be improved with 2 non-ECG exercise test measures, exercise capacity (metabolic equivalents, or METs) and heart rate recovery (HRR). METHODS AND RESULTS: An asymptomatic cohort with baseline treadmill tests (n=6126; 46% women, FRS <20%) was followed up prospectively for 20 years. Individuals with low (median or less) HRR or METs experienced 91% of all cardiovascular disease (CVD) deaths (225/246). After FRS adjustment, low HRR and METs individually were highly significant predictors of CVD death, but low HRR and METs together were associated with substantially higher risk (adjusted hazard ratio compared with high HRR/high METs for women 8.51, 95% CI 3.65 to 19.84; for men, 3.53, 95% CI 2.03 to 6.15; P<0.001 for both). At 10-year follow-up, FRS-adjusted CVD death risk associated with low HRR/low METs was less than at 20 years but remained significant (women 3.83, 95% CI 1.09 to 13.47, and men 2.70, 95% CI 1.11 to 6.55). The application of HRR/METs information to FRS assessment identified those at high risk (>0.5% annual CVD mortality) in half of women with FRS 6% to 9% and 10% to 19% and just under half of men with FRS 10% to 19%. Low HRR/low METs was also associated with an increased relative risk of CVD death in individuals with low-risk FRS (FRS <6% in women and <10% in men), but absolute CVD mortality rates were low in this subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise testing may be a useful adjunct for clinical risk assessment in asymptomatic women with FRS 6% to 19% and men with FRS 10% to 19%.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mora et al. (2005) conducted a cohort in Asymptomatic individuals (n=6,126). Low heart rate recovery (HRR) and low metabolic equivalents (METs) vs. High HRR and high METs was evaluated on Cardiovascular disease (CVD) death (HR 8.51 (women), HR 3.53 (men), 95% CI 3.65-19.84 (women), 2.03-6.15 (men), p=<0.001). Low heart rate recovery and metabolic equivalents increased cardiovascular death risk versus high HRR/METs in women (HR 8.51, 95% CI 3.65-19.84) and men (HR 3.53, 95% CI 2.03-6.15).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: