Racca Vittorio, Castiglioni Paolo, Panzarino Claudia, Oliva Fabrizio, Perna Enrico, Ferratini Maurizio
Cardiology Rehabilitation Center - Santa Maria Nascente Institute IRCCS, Don C. Gnocchi Foundation, Milan, Italy.
Biomedical Technology Department - Santa Maria Nascente Institute IRCCS, Don C. Gnocchi Foundation, Milan, Italy.
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 3;12(10):e0185717. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185717. eCollection 2017.
A rising number of patients are surgically treated for heart failure at the more advanced stage, thanks to the increasing use of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as a reliable alternative to heart transplantation (HTx). However, it is still unknown whether differences exist between the two surgical approaches in the efficacy of rehabilitation programmes. Therefore, aim of this study was to evaluate whether functional capacity and rehabilitative outcomes differ between HTx and implantation of LVAD.
We enrolled 51 patients with HTx and 46 with LVAD upon admission to our rehabilitation-unit. We evaluated six-minute walking test (6MWT), resting oxygen saturation (SaO2) and nutritional assessment before and after a standardised cardiovascular rehabilitation programme. HTx and LVAD groups differed in age, anthropometric variables, gender distribution. Upon enrolment, 6MWT distance was similar in the two groups, whereas malnutrition was less frequent and the waist circumference/height ratio (WHtR) was greater in LVAD patients. SaO2 was greater in HTx patients. Rehabilitation improved SaO2, 6MWT distance and nutritional status. The difference in malnutrition disappeared, but WHtR remained higher in the LVAD and SaO2 higher in the HTx patients; the 6MWT distance improved more in the HTx patients. Multivariate linear regression analysis confirmed that the type of intervention was independent predictor of 6MWT distance after rehabilitation.
HTx patients improve more rapidly and perform better after rehabilitation, suggesting the need for more tailored rehabilitation training for LVAD patients.
由于越来越多地使用左心室辅助装置(LVAD)作为心脏移植(HTx)的可靠替代方案,越来越多处于更晚期阶段的心力衰竭患者接受了手术治疗。然而,两种手术方法在康复计划疗效方面是否存在差异仍不清楚。因此,本研究的目的是评估HTx和LVAD植入术后的功能能力和康复结果是否不同。
我们纳入了51例HTx患者和46例LVAD患者,他们在进入我们的康复单元时被收治。我们在标准化心血管康复计划前后评估了6分钟步行试验(6MWT)、静息血氧饱和度(SaO2)和营养状况。HTx组和LVAD组在年龄、人体测量变量、性别分布方面存在差异。入院时,两组的6MWT距离相似,而LVAD患者营养不良的发生率较低,腰围/身高比(WHtR)较高。HTx患者的SaO2较高。康复改善了SaO2、6MWT距离和营养状况。营养不良的差异消失了,但LVAD患者的WHtR仍然较高,HTx患者的SaO2较高;HTx患者的6MWT距离改善得更多。多变量线性回归分析证实,干预类型是康复后6MWT距离的独立预测因素。
HTx患者康复后改善更快且表现更好,这表明需要为LVAD患者提供更具针对性的康复训练。