Key result
Upright exercise right heart catheterization resulted in 50% of patients who met HFpEF criteria in the supine position failing to meet the criteria in the upright position.
Why the study?
Body positions influence hemodynamics during invasive exercise right heart catheterization, but the discrepancy in HFpEF diagnosis between supine versus upright exercise testing was unknown.
Does upright exercise right heart catheterization compared to supine exercise testing alter the diagnosis of HFpEF in patients referred for evaluation?
Observational (n=36)
Yes
Does upright exercise right heart catheterization compared to supine exercise testing alter the diagnosis of HFpEF in patients referred for evaluation?
Half of patients diagnosed with HFpEF by supine exercise hemodynamics do not meet criteria during upright exercise, suggesting supine testing may overdiagnose HFpEF or identify a milder phenotype.
Supine exercise RHC may overdiagnose HFpEF; leaves open optimal testing position and need for prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Invasive exercise right heart catheterization is a gold standard in diagnosing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Body positions during the test influence hemodynamics. However, the discrepancy in HFpEF diagnosis between exercise testing in supine versus upright position is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a 2-center prospective study enrolling patients referred for exercise right heart catheterization for HFpEF. We performed a Supright protocol integrating submaximal supine bicycle ergometry (20 W) followed by maximal upright bicycle ergometry with a breath-by-breath oxygen analyzer. HFpEF hemodynamic criteria specific to testing positions were applied. Patients were considered to have concordant HFpEF if they met criteria in both positions or discordant HFpEF if they met criteria only in the supine position. RESULTS: Of 36 patients who met HFpEF criteria in supine position, 18 (50%) did not meet criteria in upright position (discordant HFpEF). Discordant HFpEF had less atrial fibrillation (0% versus 55%; P <0.001), lower left atrial volume (60±14 versus 77±21 mL; P =0.010), and lower H 2 FPEF score (2.1±1.3 versus 5.1±2.3; P <0.001). In supine position, pulmonary arterial wedge pressure was lower in discordant HFpEF at rest (15±4 versus 19±7 mm Hg; P =0.040). In upright position, pulmonary arterial wedge pressure was lower in discordant HFpEF both at rest (8±4 versus 14±6 mm Hg; P =0.002) and at peak exercise (14±4 versus 27±7 mm Hg; P <0.001). Pulmonary arterial wedge pressure/cardiac output slope was lower in discordant HFpEF (1.6±1.7 versus 3.6±2.9; P <0.001). Maximal workload (46±18 versus 49±24 W; P =0.59) or peak oxygen consumption (11.4±2.8 versus 12.9±3.4 mL/[kg·min]; P =0.15) was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Half of patients who met HFpEF criteria in the supine position did not meet the criteria in the upright position. Patients with a discordant HFpEF phenotype had less structural and hemodynamic abnormalities compared with those with concordant HFpEF. A Supright exercise right heart catheterization approach is feasible and merits further investigation to determine the clinical implications of discordant exercise hemodynamic findings in supine and upright positions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fudim et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (n=36). Upright exercise right heart catheterization vs. Supine exercise right heart catheterization was evaluated on Discordant HFpEF diagnosis (meeting criteria in supine but not upright position). Upright exercise right heart catheterization resulted in 50% of patients who met HFpEF criteria in the supine position failing to meet the criteria in the upright position.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: