Key result
Breath-holding duration inversely correlates with CO2 tests to reliably assess peripheral chemoreflex sensitivity in HF.
Why the study?
The assessment of peripheral chemoreflex sensitivity in patients with chronic heart failure remains an actual problem despite its importance as a marker of severity and prognosis.
Does the Breath-Holding Test reliably assess peripheral chemoreflex sensitivity compared to the single-breath carbon dioxide test in patients with chronic heart failure?
Observational (n=43)
No
Does the Breath-Holding Test reliably assess peripheral chemoreflex sensitivity compared to the single-breath carbon dioxide test in patients with chronic heart failure?
The breath-holding test is a reliable and safe alternative to the single-breath carbon dioxide test for assessing peripheral chemoreflex sensitivity in patients with chronic heart failure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May enable simpler chemoreflex assessment in HF; leaves open clinical adoption pending prospective validation.
Background: The sensitivity of peripheral chemoreflex is a marker of the severity of heart failure and the prognosis of the outcome in these patients. The assessment of chemosensitivity in these patients remains an actual problem. Objective: The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between a Breath-Holding Test (BHT) and single-breath carbon dioxide test and to evaluate the reliability of both tests in patients with Heart Failure (HF). Method: The study was performed in 43 patients with chronic heart failure. All subjects underwent BHT and single-breath carbon dioxide (CB-CO2), the evaluation of both tests was repeated a month later. Relationship of two test was evaluated by correlation analysis. Reliability was assessed with calculation of Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), Coefficient of Variation (CV) and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). Results: The duration of the breath-holding was inversely correlated to the result of CB-CO2 test (r = -0.86 at first measurement and r = -0.79 after a month) The ICC was 0.87 (95%CI: 0.78–0.93) for SB-CO2 test and 0,93 (95%CI: 0.88–0.96) for BHT, the CV was 24% for SB-CO2 and 13% for BHT. SEM for SB-CO2 test was 0.04 L / min / mmHg and limits of variation was 0.11 L / min / mmHg; SEM for BHT was 3.6 sec and limits of variation was10 sec. Conclusion: Breath-holding test is a reliable and safe method for assessing the sensitivity of peripheral chemoreflex to carbon dioxide in patients with heart failure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Трембач et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Chronic Heart Failure (n=43). Breath-Holding Test (BHT) vs. Single-breath carbon dioxide (SB-CO2) test was evaluated on Correlation between breath-holding duration and single-breath carbon dioxide test result (r = -0.86, p=<0.05). The duration of voluntary breath-holding was strongly inversely correlated with the single-breath carbon dioxide test result (r = -0.86, p<0.05), demonstrating its reliability for assessing peripheral chemoreflex sensitivity in heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: