Global Longitudinal Strain Predicts Poor Functional Capacity in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure

Abstract

Background:

Left ventricular global longitudinal strain value (GLS) can predict functional capacity in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) heart failure (HF) and to assess prognosis in reduced LVEF HF.

Objetive:

Correlate GLS with parameters of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test (CPET) and to assess if they could predict systolic HF patients that are more appropriated to be referred to heart transplantation according to CPET criteria.

Methods:

Systolic HF patients with LVEF < 45%, NYHA functional class II and III, underwent prospectively CPET and echocardiography with strain analysis. LVEF and GLS were correlated with the following CPET variables: maxVO₂, VE/VCO₂ slope, heart rate reduction during the first minute of recovery (HRR) and time needed to reduce maxVO₂ in 50% after physical exercise (T_1/2VO₂). ROC curve analysis of GLS to predict VO₂ < 14 mL/kg/min and VE/VCO₂ slope > 35 (heart transplantation’s criteria) was performed.

Results:

Twenty six patients were selected (age, 47 ± 12 years, 58% men, mean LVEF = 28 ± 8%). LVEF correlated only with maxVO₂ and T_1/2VO₂. GLS correlated to all CPET variables (maxVO₂: r = 0.671, p = 0.001; VE/VCO₂ slope: r = -0.513, p = 0.007; HRR: r = 0.466, p = 0.016, and T_1/2VO₂: r = -0.696, p = 0.001). GLS area under the ROC curve to predict heart transplantation’s criteria was 0.88 (sensitivity 75%, specificity 83%) for a cut-off value of -5.7%, p = 0.03.

Conclusion:

GLS was significantly associated with all functional CPET parameters. It could classify HF patients according to the functional capacity and may stratify which patients have a poor prognosis and therefore to deserve more differentiated treatment, such as heart transplantation.

Keywords:
Heart Failure; Longitudinal Strain; Torsion, Mechanical; Torsion Abnormality; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left; Echocardiography, Doppler/methods

Resumo

Fundamento:

O strain longitudinal global (SLG) é capaz de predizer a capacidade funcional dos pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca (IC) e fração de ejeção do ventrículo esquerdo (FEVE) preservada, e avaliar o prognóstico na IC com FEVE reduzida.

Objetivo:

Correlacionar o SLG com parâmetros do teste de exercício cardiopulmonar (TECP), e avaliar se o SLG seria capaz de predizer quais pacientes com IC sistólica deveriam ser encaminhados ao transplante cardíaco de acordo com os critérios do TECP.

Métodos:

Os pacientes com IC sistólica com FEVE <45%, classe funcional NYHA II e III, submeteram-se prospectivamente ao TECP e à ecocardiografia com análise do strain. A FEVE e o SLG foram correlacionados com as seguintes variáveis do TECP: maxVO₂, inclinação de VE/VCO₂, redução da frequência cardíaca durante o primeiro minuto de recuperação (RFC), e tempo necessário para a redução do maxVO₂ em 50% após o exercício físico (T_1/2VO₂). Foi realizada análise da curva ROC do SLG em predizer um VO₂ < 14 mL/kg/min e uma inclinação de VE/VCO₂ > 35 (critérios para transplante cardíaco). O nível de significância adotado na análise estatística foi de p < 0,05.

Resultados:

Vinte e seis pacientes foram selecionados para o estudo (idade, 47±12 anos, 58% homens, FEVE média LVEF = 28 ± 8%). A FEVE correlacionou-se somente com o maxVO₂ e o T_1/2VO₂. O SLG correlacionou-se com todas as variáveis do TECP (maxVO₂: r = 0,671; p = 0,001; inclinação de VE/VCO₂: r = -0,513; p = 0,007; RFC: r = 0,466; p = 0,016; e T_1/2VO₂: r = -0,696, p = 0,001). A área sob a curva ROC para o SLG para predizer os critérios para transplante cardíaco foi de 0,88 (sensibilidade 75%, especificidade 83%) para um ponto de corte de -5,7%, p = 0,03.

Conclusão:

O SLG apresentou associação significativa com todos os parâmetros funcionais do TECP. O SLG foi capaz de classificar os pacientes com IC segundo capacidade funcional e possivelmente pode identificar quais pacientes têm um prognóstico ruim e, portanto, se beneficiariam de um tratamento diferenciado, tal como o transplante cardíaco.

Palavras-chave:
Insuficiência Cardíaca; Strain Longitudinal; Torção Mecânica; Anormalidade Torcional; Disfunção Ventricular Esquerda; Ecocardiografia Doppler/métodos

Introduction

The cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is the gold standard method for assessing functional capacity in patients with heart failure (HF). It is able to measure during exercise, maximum myocardial oxygen consumption (maxVO₂), CO₂ production, ratio minute ventilation/carbon dioxide production VE/VCO₂ slope, VO₂ recovery kinetics after physical exertion (T_1/2VO₂), stratify cardiovascular risk and predict mortality and hospitalization by these parameters, for example, VO₂ values < 14 mL/kg/min and VE/VCO₂ slope >35 that are criteria for heart transplantation.^1-4 Furthermore, CPET evaluates the presence of dysautonomia, by measuring the reduction in heart rate within the first minute after exercise (HRR),^5,6 which is directly related to cardiovascular outcome.^7-9

However, in patients with systolic HF, the reduction of myocardial contractility, measured mainly by echocardiography through the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), is the main parameter used to classify the myocardial damage degree,¹⁰ although its value is little associated with the clinical symptoms and functional capacity of these patients.^1,10 The strain analysis is a newer echocardiography tool and has demonstrated more effective in assessing global derangement of the left ventricle (LV) than the LVEF measurement.¹⁰

Recent studies show that the left ventricular global longitudinal strain value (GLS) can predict functional capacity in patients with HF and preserved LVEF,¹¹ and assess prognosis in HF with reduced LVEF when compared with life expectancy scores.¹² Additionally, this technique evaluates the degree of myocardial deformation and it seems to predict the degree of regional and global LV fibrosis.¹³ However, there are no studies comparing the GLS with CPET parameters in patients with systolic HF. The aim of this study was to correlate GLS value with functional parameters of CPET and to assess if GLS could predict systolic HF patients that were more appropriated to be referred to heart transplantation according to CPET criteria.

Methods

This is an observational, prospective cross-sectional study, guided by the recommendations of the STROBE Statement.¹⁴ This study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of our Institution under number 1507992.

The study population consisted of adults (21-65 years), both sexes, diagnosed with HF in functional class II and III by the New York Heart Association (NYHA), sedentary, with systolic dysfunction (LVEF <45%) assessed by transthoracic echocardiography performed until one month before they had been referred for cardiopulmonary program and recruited for this study. Data were collected between January, 2015 and March, 2016.

Exclusion criteria were: deformity in the face to prevent the coupling of the CPET mask, orthopedic and neurological diseases that could preclude the execution of CPET, psychological problems restricting them to respond to the questionnaire, functional class IV HF or hospitalization due to cardiac decompensation in the last three months, unstable angina, myocardial infarction or cardiac surgery up to three months before the study; forced expiratory volume on the first one second/forced vital capacity <70% of predicted characterizing obstructive respiratory disorder.

To ensure standardization, a single examiner performed the exams. None of them had access to the patients’ other evaluations results. The researchers responsible for data collection were not responsible for carrying out the examinations, thus ensuring the blinding of the study.

Cardiopulmonary exercise test

All patients in the study underwent CPET by the method ramp on a treadmill (Centurium 300, Micromed, Brazil) through ErgoPC Elite® software associated with the electrocardiogram (Micromed, Brazil) with 12 channels. Respiratory variables were evaluated by a gas analyzer (Cortex - Metalyzer II, Germany) and obtained in conditions of standard temperature, pressure and dry (STPD), breath-by-breath, with the patient breathing in a face mask without leaks during exercise. During the test, functional capacity, maxVO₂ measured in METs, the maximum VE/VCO₂, VE/VCO₂ slope, T_1/2VO₂ and HRR were evaluated.

Echocardiography

All echocardiograms were performed according to ASE.^{(14 )}Patients underwent the two-dimensional echocardiography, using an ultrasound system Vivid I (GE Medical Systems, Horten, Norway) with a multifrequency transducer from 2.5 to 5 MHz.

After the echocardiogram, a strain analysis technique was performed using an echocardiogram analysis software (EchoPAC, GE Medical Systems, Horten, Norway, version 10.0). The images in the longitudinal sections were analyzed (4 chambers, 3 chambers and 2 chambers).¹⁵ A region of interest was applied automatically by the software and, if necessary, was adjusted manually. The strain analysis software performed the analysis. Patients were excluded when more than two segments were considered to have insufficient quality for monitoring by the analysis system.¹⁶

Statistical analysis

To calculate the sample, G*Power 3 software was used,¹⁷ in which we chose the post hoc option with α = 0.05 and two-tailed hypothesis. Thus, the two most important ergospirometric variables were chosen for the study population: maxVO₂ and VE/VCO₂ slope. We found an effect size of 0.81 (R² = 0.67) for the maxVO₂ and 0.71 (R² = 0.51) for the VE/VCO₂ slope. We observed for both variables a power of 99% with a total sample of 25 patients.

Patients were later divided into two groups according to values of maxVO₂ and VE/VCO₂ slope found to CPET: Group 1 - maxVO₂> 14mL/kg/min and/or VE/VCO₂ slope < 35; and Group 2 - maxVO₂ < 14mL/kg/ min and VE/VCO₂ slope > 35 (IIa class indication criteria for heart transplantation).¹⁶

The data was presented by absolute and percentage frequencies for categorical variables; by the mean and standard deviation for parametric quantitative variables; and by median and interquartile range for non-parametric variables. Shapiro-Wilk test was applied to verify if the quantitative data were normals. For comparison of parametric variables, we used the Student t-test for independent samples and for non-parametric variables the Mann-Whitney test. To compare categorical variables, we used the chi-square non-parametric test.

In the second step, the correlation between the values of the GLS strain index with ergospirometric variables was performed by using the Pearson coefficient for parametric and Spearman variables for non-parametric variables. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve was performed to evaluate the GLS's ability to predict maxVO₂ < 14 mL/kg/min and VE/VCO₂ slope > 35.

P value inferior to 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data were entered in an EXCEL spreadsheet and statistical software used for statistical calculations was the SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 23.

Results

During the study period, 39 patients with HF were referred to the cardiopulmonary rehabilitation program. Of these, 10 were not included because of a LVEF higher than 45%, one patient for presenting inadequate acoustic window for subsequent analysis of the GLS and two patients due to arrhythmia. Therefore, 26 patients (mean age, 47±12 years, 58% men) participated in this study, Table 1.

Table 1
Characteristics of the study population

Variable	(n = 26)
Age (years), mean ± DP	47.31 ± 12.71
Gender: n (%)
Men	15 (57.7)
Women	11 (42.3)
BMI (Kg/m2): Mean ± DP	29.31 ± 5.38
Comorbidities: n (%)
SAH	20 (77)
DM	15 (61)
HF Etiology: n (%)
Ischemic	6 (23)
Hypertensive	10 (39)
Myocarditis	4 (15)
Chagas' Disease	1 (4)
Idiopathic	5 (19)
Medication: n (%)
ACEI/ARB	23 (88)
Beta blocker	26 (100)
Diuretics K-sparing	22 (84)
LVEF (%) (mean ± DP)	28,0 ± 8.62
Strain (%) (mean ± DP)	-7.5 ± 3.92
maxVO2 (mean ± DP)	19.09 ± 9.52
VE/VCO2slope(mean ± DP)	39.43 ± 9.91
HRR (bpm) (mean ± DP)	19.65 ± 17.42
T1/2VO2 (s) (mean ± DP)	168.61 ± 43.90

• BMI: body mass index; SAH: systemic arterial hypertension; DM: diabetes mellitus; ACEI/ARB: converting the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; maxVO₂: maximal oxygen consumption; VE/VCO₂ slope: slope of the VE/VCO₂ curve; HRR: heart rate recovery; T_1/2VO₂: time to VO₂ halving recovery.

Regarding the CPET results the average maxVO₂ was 19.09 ± 9,52 mL/kg/min and the VE/VCO₂ slope was 39.43 ± 9.91. The mean HRR and T_1/2VO₂ were respectively, 19.65 ± 17.42 bpm and 168.61 ± 43.90s. By echocardiography, the mean LVEF was 28.0 ± 8.6% and mean GLS index was -7.5 ± 3.92 % for all studied patients, Table 1.

Correlation of CPET variables with LVEF and GLS measurements

When comparing the CPET with LVEF data (Table 2), a positive correlation was observed only with maxVO₂ (r = 0.585, p = 0.02) and negative with T_1/2VO₂ (r = -0.530; p = 0.005). For the other variables, LVEF showed no correlation, Table 2.

Table 2
Correlation of numerical variables of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain index (GLS)

Variables	LVEF (p value)	GLS (p value)
HRR-bpm	0.288 (0.154)(1)	0.466 (0.016)*(1)
maxVO2	0.585 (0.002)*(2)	0.671 (< 0.001)*(2)
VE/VCO2 slope	-0.330 (0.100)(1)	-0.513 (0.007)*(1)
T1/2VO2	-0.530 (0.005)*(1)	-0.696 (< 0.001)*(1)

• HRR: heart rate recovery; T_1/2VO₂: time to VO₂ halving recovery; VE/VCO₂ slope: slope of the VE/VCO₂ curve; maxVO₂: maximal oxygen consumption.
• ^*
  p < 0,05;
• ⁽¹⁾
  Pearson coefficient;
• ⁽²⁾
  Spearman coefficient.

The GLS showed significant correlation with all analysed CPET variables. This parameter was positively correlated with maxVO₂ and HRR and inversely with VE/VCO₂ slope and T_1/2VO₂, Table 2 and Figure 1.

Figure 1
Global longitudinal strain index (GLS) scatter plots compared to maxVO2, VE/VCO2 slope, HRR, and T1/2VO2. maxVO2: maximal oxygen consumption; VE/VCO2 slope: slope of the VE/VCO2 curve; HRR: heart rate recovery; T1/2VO2: time to VO2 halving recovery.

Regarding VO₂ group > 14 mL/kg/min and/or VE/VCO₂ slope < 35 and VO₂ group < 14 mL/kg/min and VE/VCO₂ slope > 35, there were no differences in clinical variables, comorbidities and medications used. However, echocardiographic variables showed differences, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3
Comparison between Group 1 - VO₂ max > 14 mL/kg/min and/or VE/VCO₂ slope < 35 and Group 2 - maxVO₂ < 14 mL/kg/ min and VE/VCO₂ slope > 35

Variables	VO2 > 14 mL/kg/min and/or VE/VCO2 slope < 35 (n = 18)	VO2 < 14 mL/kg/min and VE/VCO2 slope > 35 (n = 8)	p value
Age (years): Mean ± DP	45.7 ± 13.7	51.0 ± 10.0	0.334(1)
Gender: n (%)
Men	11 (61.1)	4 (50.0)	0.6832
Women	7 (38.9)	4 (50.0)
BMI (Kg/m2): Mean ± DP	29.4 ± 6.1	29.0 ± 3.7	0.849(3)
Comorbidities: n (%)
SAH	13 (72.2)	7 (87.5)	0.6282
DM	10 (55.6)	6 (75.0)	0.4202
HF Etiology: n (%)
Ischemic	5 (27.8)	1 (12.5)	0.6282
Hypertensive	7 (38.9)	3 (37.5)	1.0002
Myocarditis	3 (16.7)	1 (12.5)	1.0002
Chagas' disease	1 (5.6)	0 (0.0)	1.0002
Idiopatic	2 (11.1)	3 (37.5)	0.2812
Medication: n(%)
ACEI/ARB	16 (88.9)	7 (87.5)	1.0002
Beta blocker	18 (100.0)	8 (100.0)	1.0002
Diuretics K-sparing	15 (83.3)	7 (87.5)	1.0002
LVEF (%) (mean ± DP)	30.6 ± 8.5	22.4 ± 6.0	0.021(1)
Strain (%) (mean ± DP)	8.6 ± 3.8	5.2 ± 3.3	0.037(3)
maxVO2 (mean ± DP)	22.1 ± 10.0	12.4 ± 3.3	0.014(3)
VE/VCO2 slope (mean ± DP)	35.8 ± 9.3	47.5 ± 5.8	0.003(1)
HRR (bpm) (mean ± DP)	20.2 ± 17.2	18.4 ± 19.0	0.004(3)
T1/2VO2 (s) (mean ± DP)	147.5 ± 32.1	216.1 ± 25.7	< 0.001(1)

• BMI: body mass index; SAH: hypertension; DM: diabetes mellitus; ACEI/ARB: converting the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; maxVO₂: maximal oxygen consumption; VE/VCO₂ slope: slope of the VE/VCO₂ curve; HRR: heart rate recovery; T_1/2VO₂: time to VO₂ halving recovery.
• ⁽¹⁾
  Student t test;
• ⁽²⁾
  Mann-Whitney test;
• ⁽³⁾
  chi-square test.

The area under the ROC curve (Figure 2) for the GLS index value as a predictor of poor functional capacity and worse prognosis was 0.88 (95% CI = 0.75 to 1.00), with a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 83%, positive predictive value of 67%, and negative predictive value of 88%, for a cut-off GLS value of -5.7%, p = 0.03.

Figure 2
ROC curve for evaluating the ability of the global longitudinal strain index (GLS) in predicting VO2 < 14 mL/kg/min and VE/VCO2 slope > 35. Sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 83% for a GLS cut-off of -5.7%, p = 0.03.

Discussion

In this study, in patients with systolic HF referred for a cardiopulmonary rehabilitation program, the GLS was significantly associated with all functional CPET parameters. It seems to be more accurate than LVEF in classifying patients with HF according to the functional capacity and thus may stratify which patients have a poor prognosis and therefore to deserve more differentiated treatment, such as heart transplantation.

Previous studies have demonstrated that LVEF has no correlation with functional capacity.^1,10 However, there is limited data on the association between exercise tolerance and the results of analysis by cardiac strain. This study showed that LVEF was associated with maxVO₂ and T_1/2VO₂, however, showed no correlation with the other CPET variables. Whereas peak VO₂ values and VE/VCO₂ slope are parameters which help in end-stage HF decision making^4,16 and that in this study, the GLS value was correlated with all these variables, we could suggest that the GLS may have a prognostic significance in this group of patients. In addition, GLS correlation with maxVO₂ and T_1/2VO₂ was better than LVEF, thus demonstrating that the GLS is a more accurate tool.

Hasselberg et al.,¹¹ in their study that evaluated HF patients, either with normal or reduced LVEF, were able to show the importance of GLS as a predictor of exercise capacity in patients with preserved LVEF HF.¹¹ However, these authors have failed to demonstrate this relationship in patients with reduced LVEF. In the present study, we observed this correlation between GLS and functional capacity. This may have occurred since our study evaluated patients in more advanced stages of cardiac dysfunction. The average GLS in our study was worse than the Hasselbach study.¹¹

The T_1/2VO₂ has also proven an important tool for predicting outcomes. The longer the VO₂ recovery time of HF patients after physical exercise, the worse the cardiovascular prognosis.^18-21 Our study demonstrated that the GLS was able to determine patients that have delayed recovery of VO₂. The lower the value of GLS, the greater the time required for the post-physical effort VO₂ to be reduced to half, suggesting the hypothesis that the GLS could estimate the prognosis of the patient.

Another evidence that supports the prognostic importance of GLS was dysautonomia analysis. It is known that there is a relationship between HRR in the first minute after physical exercise with mortality. The cardiovascular prognosis appears to be independent of symptoms, the type of recovery protocol, LVEF, and severity of coronary lesions in coronary angiography.^7-9,21,22 This study showed a direct relationship between the GLS value and HRR in the first minute after effort, with a less accentuated drop in heart rate in patients who had a lower GLS value.

Cameli et al.,¹³ evaluated patients with severe HF, with cardiac transplant indication, and, by histopathology of the heart after heart transplantation, found that no echocardiographic parameter, performed before heart transplant, was able to correlate with the presence of fibrosis except the GLS value. Therefore, a lower GLS value indicates that there is presence of more cardiac fibrosis, and consequently, there is less deformation and myocardium thickening, and relaxation and contractility is more defective. These changes entail low functional capacity and are responsible for worse prognosis.¹³ However, in that study, functional capacity was not assessed through an objective test, such as CPET.

Rangel et al.¹² evaluated patients with LVEF less than 45% and demonstrated that the GLS value correlates with more advanced stages of the disease and is an independent predictor of life expectancy.¹² That is, in patients with severe HF and similar LVEF, GLS was able to show which patients would present an unfavourable outcome. Our study showed that in patients with reduced LVEF, the lowest GLS value was correlated with CPET parameters that assess exercise tolerance and prognosis disease.

When rating the GLS cut-off in predicting poor prognosis, Rangel et al.¹² used the Seattle HF model to assess the long-term survival, and it was shown that the best GLS cut-off point was -9.5%. Our study correlated the GLS value with CPET parameters and suggested a cut-off point of -5.7% for GLS value, with sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 83% in predicting CPET heart transplantation’s criteria.

Study limitations

Considering the small number of patients included in this study, our findings that the GLS showed a strong correlation with the CPET data and have been able to identify the patients who had ergospirometric criteria of worse prognosis, need to be proven through a study with a larger number of patients and of long-term monitoring, and thus determine the real power of GLS in the prognostic assessment and therapeutic setting in systolic HF.

Conclusion

In systolic HF patients, the GLS showed significant association with the main parameters of CPET and was able to classify patients with low functional capacity. Thus, GLS may be a more accurate parameter than LVEF in stratifying systolic HF patients. Moreover, it may play a role in helping to evaluate patients in the end stage of HF.

• Sources of Funding
  This study was funded by FACEPE APQ-0154-4.08/15; FACEPE IBPG-0450-4.08/17; National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) 432865/2016-0 and Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES).
• Study Association
  This article is part of the thesis of master submitted by Rafael José Coelho Maia, from Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.
• Ethics approval and consent to participate
  This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Universidade Federal de Pernambuco under the protocol number 38572614.1.000.5208. All the procedures in this study were in accordance with the 1975 Helsinki Declaration, updated in 2013. Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

References

• ¹
  Arena R, Guazzi M, Cahalin LP, Myers J. Revisiting cardiopulmonary exercise testing applications in heart failure: aligning evidence with clinical practice. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2014;42(4):153-60.
• ²
  Arena R, Myers J, Aslam SS, Varughese EB, Peberdy MA. Peak VO2 and VE/VCO2 slope in patients with heart failure: a prognostic comparison. Am Heart J. 2004;147(2):354-60.
• ³
  Guazzi M, Adams V, Conraads V, Halle M, Mezzani A, Vanhees L, et al. EACPR/AHA Scientific Statement. Clinical recommendations for cardiopulmonary exercise testing data assessment in specific patient populations. Circulation. 2012;126(18):2261-74.
• ⁴
  Parikh MN, Lund LH, Goda A, Mancini D. Usefulness of peak exercise oxygen consumption and the heart failure survival score to predict survival in patients &gt;65 years of age with heart failure. Am J Cardiol. 2009;103(7):998-1002.
• ⁵
  Arena R, Myers J, Abella J, Peberdy MA, Bensimhon D, Chase P, et al. The prognostic value of the heart rate response during exercise and recovery in patients with heart failure: Influence of beta-blockade. Int J Cardiol. 2010;138(2):166-73.
• ⁶
  Freeman JV, Dewey FE, Hadlay DM, Myers J, Froelicher V. Autonomic nervous system interaction with the cardiovascular system during exercise. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2006;48(5):342-62.
• ⁷
  Schwartz P, La Rovete MT, Vanoli E. Autonomic nervous system and sudden cardiac death. Experimental basis and clinical observations for post-myocardial infarction risk stratification. Circulation. 1992;85(1 Suppl):I77-91.
• ⁸
  Maddox T, Ross C, Ho P, Masoudi F, MAgid D, Daugherty SL, et al. The prognostic importance of abnormal heart rate recovery and chronotropic response among exercise treadmill test patients. Am Hear J. 2008;156(4):736-44.
• ⁹
  Lahiri MK, Kannankeril PJ, Goldberger JJ. Assessment of autonomic function in cardiovascular disease: physicological basis and prognostic implication. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(18):1725-33.
• ¹⁰
  Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JGF, Coats AJS, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(27):2129-2200.
• ¹¹
  Hasselberg NE, Haugaa KH, Sarvari SI, Gullestad L, Andreassen AK, Smiseth OA, et al. Left ventricular global longitudinal strain is associated with exercise capacity in failing hearts with preserved and reduced ejection fraction. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16(2):217-24.
• ¹²
  Rangel I, Gonçalves A, de Sousa C, Almeida PB, Rodrigues J, Macedo F, et al. Global longitudinal strain as a potential prognostic marker in patients with chronic heart failure and systolic dysfunction. Rev Port Cardiol. 2014;33(7-8):403-9.
• ¹³
  Cameli M, Mondillo S, Righini FM, Lisi M, Dokollari A, Lindqvist P, et al. Left ventricular deformation and myocardial fibrosis in patients with advanced heart failure requiring transplantation. J Card Fail. 2016;22(11):901-7.
• ¹⁴
  Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, Afilalo J, Armstrong A, Ernande L, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015;28(1):1-39
• ¹⁵
  Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vanderbroucke JP, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Epidemiology. 2007;18(6):800-4.
• ¹⁶
  Bocchi E, Marcondes-Braga FG, Bacal F, Ferraz AS, Albuquerque D, Rodrigues D, et al. atualização da diretriz brasileira de insuficiência cardíaca crônica - 2012. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2012;98(1 supl. 1):1-33.
• ¹⁷
  Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G* Power 3: a flexible stattistical power analyses program for the social, behavioral and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175-91.
• ¹⁸
  de Groote P, Milleire A, Decoulx E, Nugue O, Guimier P, Ducloux. Kinetics of oxygen consumption during and after exercise in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. New markers of exercise intolerance with clinical implications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28(1):168-75.
• ¹⁹
  Scrutinio D, Passantino A, Lagioia R, Napoli F, Ricci A, Rizzon P. Percent achieved of predicted peak exercise oxygen uptake and kinetics of recovery of oxygen uptake after exercise for risk stratification in chronic heart failure. Int J Cardiol. 1998;64(2):117-24.
• ²⁰
  Queirós MC, Mendes DE, Ribeiro MA, Mendes M, Rebocho Ma J, Seabra-Gomes R. Recovery kinetics of oxygen uptake after cardiopulmonar exercise test and prognosis in patien0ts with left ventricular dysfunction. Rev Port Cardiol.2002;21(4):383-98.
• ²¹
  Vivekananthan DP, Blackstone EH, Pothier CE, Lauer MS. Heart rate recovery after exercise is a predictor of mortality, independent of the angiographic severity of coronary disease. J Am Col Cardiol. 2003;42(5):831-8.
• ²²
  Cole CR, Blackstone EH, Pashkow FJ, Snader CE, Lauer MS. Heart-rate recovery immediately after exercise as a predictor of mortality. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(18):1351-7.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  18 July 2019
• Date of issue
  Aug 2019

History

• Received
  19 July 2018
• Reviewed
  28 Oct 2018
• Accepted
  14 Nov 2018