Why the study?
Although studies report on physical fitness in neuromuscular diseases, the applicability, quality, and feasibility of CPET in this population remain largely unknown.
Is cardiopulmonary exercise testing feasible for assessing aerobic fitness in patients with neuromuscular diseases?
Is cardiopulmonary exercise testing feasible for assessing aerobic fitness in patients with neuromuscular diseases?
CPET is feasible for ambulatory patients with neuromuscular diseases, but standardized, disease-specific protocols following ATS/ACCP recommendations are needed.
INTRODUCTION: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is increasingly used to determine aerobic fitness in health and disability conditions. Patients with neuromuscular diseases (NMDs) often present with symptoms of cardiac and/or skeletal muscle dysfunction and fatigue that might impede the ability to deliver maximal cardiopulmonary effort. Although an increasing number of studies report on NMDs' physical fitness, the applicability of CPET remains largely unknown. AREAS COVERED: This systematic review synthesized evidence about the quality and feasibility of CPET in NMDs and patient's aerobic fitness. The review followed the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO number CRD42020211068). Between September and October 2020 one independent reviewer searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases. Excluding reviews and protocol description articles without baseline data, all study designs using CPET to assess adult or pediatric patients with NMDs were included. The methodological quality was assessed according to the American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians (ATS/ACCP) recommendations. EXPERT OPINION: CPET is feasible for ambulatory patients with NMDs when their functional level and the exercise modality are taken into account. However, there is still a vast potential for standardizing and designing disease-specific CPET protocols for patients with NMDs. Moreover, future studies are urged to follow the ATS/ACCP recommendations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Davoli et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: