Why the study?
Do objective measures of left ventricular function, graft patency, and exercise capacity correlate with employability after aortocoronary bypass surgery in adult males?
Do objective measures of left ventricular function, graft patency, and exercise capacity correlate with employability after aortocoronary bypass surgery in adult males?
Employability after aortocoronary bypass surgery correlates with exercise capacity rather than objective measures of left ventricular hemodynamics or graft patency.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Employability after bypass should not be predicted from LV function or graft patency; leaves open whether exercise capacity influences return to work.
The occupational status of a group of 70 male patients, 30 to 65 years of age, operated with aortocoronary bypass surgery, were studied and related to left ventricular function, number of patent grafts, and exercise ECG using a bicycle ergometer, in connection with a re‐study on an average of 14 months after operation. The patients consisted of two series of males: one series (n = 39) consisted of subjects unable to work (<<non‐active>> group), the other series (n = 31), consisted of subjects actually working up to the time of examination (<<active>> group). The <<non‐active>> group had a higher percentage of men in manual occupations (77 vs 48 %), and most of them had been temporarily or permanently disabled before operation (87 vs 55 %) compared with the <<active>> group. There was no correlation between employability. on the one hand and objective means of left ventricular function as left ventricular end‐diastolic pressure before and after angiography and ejection fraction, and number of patent grafts per patient on the other. The <<active>> group had in general increased their tolerance for exercise, and had a higher exercise capacity than the <<non‐active>> group. In the former series, all but 3 patients had a normal exercise tolerance. The increase in exercise tolerant in the <<non‐active>> group was more modest, and only 1/3 of the patients had a normal exercise capacity. Exhaustion and angina pectoris were the two principally different causes of limiting exercise, in this respect there was no difference between the two groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
S Nitter‐Hauge (1981) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: