New data to differentiate physiological vs. pathological left ventricular dilatation in athletes
Why the study?
Does indexing LVEDV to VO2peak improve the differentiation of physiological vs. pathological left ventricular dilatation compared to BSA?
Population
Athletes with left ventricular dilatation and patients with heart failure (HFrEF, HFmrEF, HFpEF)
Comparison
Indexing left ventricular end-diastolic volume… vs Indexing to body surface area or fat-free mass
Design
Editorial
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Indexing left ventricular end-diastolic volume to peak oxygen uptake is a promising approach to differentiate physiological athletic remodeling from pathological dilatation, though it requires validation in larger cohorts.
Structured PICO
Does indexing LVEDV to VO2peak improve the differentiation of physiological vs. pathological left ventricular dilatation compared to BSA?
P
Population
Athletes with left ventricular dilatation and patients with heart failure (HFrEF, HFmrEF, HFpEF)
I
Intervention
Indexing left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) to peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak)
C
Comparator
Indexing to body surface area (BSA) or fat-free mass (FFM)
O
Outcome
Correct classification of physiological vs. pathological left ventricular dilatationsurrogate
Indexing left ventricular end-diastolic volume to peak oxygen uptake is a promising approach to differentiate physiological athletic remodeling from pathological dilatation, though it requires validation in larger cohorts.
Limitations
- Small sample size used to test discriminatory ability (71 athletes and 61 heart failure patients)
- May not discriminate well in young trained individuals with mild or subclinical dilated cardiomyopathy who have normal CPET
- Potential confounding effect of beta-blockers on O2 pulse and HR in heart failure patients
Cite This Study
Niederseer et al. (2023) studied this question.