Diastolic dysfunction and exercise capacity in patients with metabolic syndrome and overweight/obesity

Left ventricle diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) is a common finding in high risk individuals, its presence being associated with reduced exercise capacity (EC). We assessed the prevalence of LVDD, applying the 2016 guidelines of the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE)/European Association of Card...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature 2019-03, Vol.22, p.67-72
Hauptverfasser: Alonso-Gómez, Angel M., Tojal Sierra, Lucas, Fortuny Frau, Elena, Goicolea Güemez, Leire, Aboitiz Uribarri, Ane, Portillo, María P., Toledo, Estefanía, Schröder, Helmut, Salas-Salvadó, Jordi, Arós Borau, Fernando
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Left ventricle diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) is a common finding in high risk individuals, its presence being associated with reduced exercise capacity (EC). We assessed the prevalence of LVDD, applying the 2016 guidelines of the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE)/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), in a population with overweight/obesity and metabolic syndrome and its association with EC. This was a prospective, cross-sectional study of a cohort of 235 patients (mean age of 65 ± 5 years old and 33% female) without heart disease and an ejection fraction >50% who underwent a complete echocardiographic assessment and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Individuals meeting three or more criteria of the 2016 ASE/EACVI guidelines are considered to have LVDD, while tests are considered indeterminate in those meeting only two. Overall, 178 (76%) of our patients met one echocardiographic cutoff value for LVDD, 91 (39%) met two and 7 (3%) three or more. Patients meeting three cutoffs values showed a significant reduction in maximal oxygen uptake (16 ± 3 vs. 19.6 ± 5 ml/kg/min, p 
ISSN:2352-9067
2352-9067
DOI:10.1016/j.ijcha.2018.12.010