Täger Tobias, Schell Miriam, Cebola Rita, Fröhlich Hanna, Dösch Andreas, Franke Jennifer, Katus Hugo A, Wians Frank H, Frankenstein Lutz
Department of Cardiology, Angiology, and Pulmonology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Department of Pathology, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Clin Res Cardiol. 2015 Oct;104(10):822-30. doi: 10.1007/s00392-015-0850-3. Epub 2015 Apr 18.
Despite the widespread application of measurements of respiratory muscle force (PImax) in clinical trials there is no data on biological variation, reference change value (RCV), or the minimal important difference (MID) for PImax irrespective of the target cohort. We addressed this issue for patients with chronic stable heart failure.
From the outpatients' clinic of the University of Heidelberg we retrospectively selected three groups of patients with stable systolic chronic heart failure (CHF). Each group had two measurements of PImax: 90 days apart in Group A (n = 25), 180 days apart in Group B (n = 93), and 365 days apart in Group C (n = 184). Stability was defined as (a) no change in NYHA class between visits and (b) absence of cardiac decompensation 3 months prior, during, and 3 months after measurements. For each group, we determined within-subject (CVI), between-subject (CVG), and total (CVT) coefficient of variation (CV), the index of individuality (II), RCV, reliability coefficient, and MID of PImax. CVT was 8.7, 7.5, and 6.9 % for groups A, B, and C, respectively. The II and RCV were 0.21, 0.20, 0.16 and 13.6, 11.6, 10.8 %, respectively. The reliability coefficient and MID were 0.83, 0.87, 0.88 and 1.44, 1.06, 1.12 kPa, respectively. Results were similar between age, gender, and aetiology subgroups.
In patients with stable CHF, measurements of PImax are highly stable for intervals up to 1 year. The low values for II suggest that evaluation of change in PImax should be performed on an individual (per patient) basis. Individually significant change can be assumed beyond 14 % (RCV) or 1.12 kPa (MID).
尽管呼吸肌力(PImax)测量在临床试验中已广泛应用,但无论目标队列如何,均无关于PImax的生物学变异、参考变化值(RCV)或最小重要差异(MID)的数据。我们针对慢性稳定心力衰竭患者解决了这一问题。
从海德堡大学门诊中,我们回顾性选择了三组收缩期慢性心力衰竭(CHF)稳定患者。每组均进行两次PImax测量:A组(n = 25)间隔90天,B组(n = 93)间隔180天,C组(n = 184)间隔365天。稳定性定义为:(a)就诊期间纽约心脏协会(NYHA)分级无变化;(b)测量前3个月、测量期间及测量后3个月无心脏失代偿。对于每组,我们确定了PImax的个体内(CVI)、个体间(CVG)和总体(CVT)变异系数(CV)、个体性指数(II)、RCV、可靠性系数和MID。A、B、C组的CVT分别为8.7%、7.5%和6.9%。II和RCV分别为0.21、0.20、0.16和13.6%、11.6%、10.8%。可靠性系数和MID分别为0.83、0.87、0.88和1.44、1.06、1.12kPa。年龄、性别和病因亚组之间的结果相似。
在稳定CHF患者中,PImax测量在长达1年的间隔内高度稳定。II值较低表明,PImax变化评估应基于个体(每位患者)进行。超过14%(RCV)或1.12kPa(MID)可认为有个体显著变化。