Key result
Cardiac rehabilitation offers clinical benefits and supports care integration in advanced heart failure.
Why the study?
Certain groups of patients with advanced heart failure, including those with implantable devices and those who are older or frail, are often excluded from cardiac rehabilitation despite its importance in heart failure management.
Does cardiac rehabilitation improve outcomes in patients with advanced heart failure?
Does cardiac rehabilitation improve outcomes in patients with advanced heart failure?
This review highlights the growing evidence supporting cardiac rehabilitation in advanced heart failure patients, advocating for better integration into existing HF programs.
CR adaptations may aid device-bearing or frail HF patients; leaves open efficacy pending dedicated trials.
Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) remains an integral part of heart failure (HF) management, yet certain groups of patients with HF, particularly those with implantable devices, and those who are older and/or frail, are often precluded from CR. We performed a narrative review discussing the benefits of CR in these groups of patients, highlighting evidence from the existing literature. We further discuss special considerations for this patient group, including CR implementation for their long-term management. Hesitancy in referring vulnerable groups of patients with HF, specifically those with advanced HF, has led to poor outcomes in this patient cohort. However, we discuss the growing evidence supporting the use of CR, thus demonstrating the importance of HF services working closely with multi-disciplinary teams to better integrate CR into existing HF programs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shariff et al. (2025) conducted a review in Advanced heart failure. Cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated. A narrative review highlights the growing evidence supporting the benefits and integration of cardiac rehabilitation in vulnerable patients with advanced heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: