Kirolos Irene, Yakoub Danny, Pendola Fiorella, Picado Omar, Kirolos Aghapy, Levine Yehoshua C, Jha Sunil, Kabra Rajesh, Cave Brandon, Khouzam Rami N
Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Cardiovascular Institute, Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare System, Memphis, TN, USA.
Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Ann Transl Med. 2019 Sep;7(17):416. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.08.64.
Cardiac rehabilitation program (CRP) is a recognized non-pharmacological modality to decrease mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) events. We aimed to evaluate the effect of CRP on the cardiac physiology in patients post myocardial infarction (MI). Online database search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, COCHRANE, and GOOGLE SCHOLAR were performed (1988-Mar 2016); key bibliographies were reviewed. Studies comparing post MI patients who were enrolled in a CRP to those who were not, were included. Standardized mean difference (SMD) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) by random and fixed effects models of pooled data were calculated. Study quality was assessed using CONSORT criteria. Outcomes of interest measured included resting and maximum heart rate (HR), peak VO, ejection fraction (EF%), wall motion score index (WMSI), left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV) in cardiac rehabilitation patients versus control. Search strategy yielded 147 studies, 23 studies fulfilled the selection criteria, 19 of which were RCTs. These included a total of 1,683 patients; 827 were enrolled in a CRP while 855 did not receive the intervention. Median age was 58 years. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, comorbidities, severity of CAD, baseline EF or HR. Meta-analysis of data included demonstrated that CRP patients had lower post-intervention resting HR than non-CRP patients (SMD: -0.59; 95% CI: -0.73 to -0.46, fixed effect model P<0.05). EF% was significantly improved after CRP compared to control (SMD: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.40, P=0.03). Peak VO was significantly improved by CRP (SMD: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.45; P<0.0001). LVEDV was significantly less in CRP patients (SMD: -0.31; 95% CI: -0.59 to -0.02, fixed effect model P<0.05). WMSI was significantly less in CRP patients (SMD: -0.41; 95% CI: -0.78 to -0.05, P=0.024). CRP improves cardiac function in post MI patients. This may explain the reported improvement of functionality and mortality among those patients. Further randomized trials may help evaluate the long-term benefits of CRP.
心脏康复计划(CRP)是一种公认的非药物治疗方式,可降低急性心肌梗死(AMI)事件后的死亡率。我们旨在评估CRP对心肌梗死(MI)后患者心脏生理功能的影响。对PubMed、MEDLINE、EMBASE、SCOPUS、COCHRANE和谷歌学术进行了在线数据库检索(1988年 - 2016年3月);对关键参考文献进行了综述。纳入比较了参加CRP的MI后患者与未参加者的研究。通过汇总数据的随机和固定效应模型计算标准化平均差(SMD)及相应的95%置信区间(CI)。使用CONSORT标准评估研究质量。所测量的感兴趣结局包括心脏康复患者与对照组的静息心率和最大心率(HR)、峰值摄氧量(VO)、射血分数(EF%)、壁运动评分指数(WMSI)、左心室舒张末期容积(LVEDV)。检索策略共获得147项研究,23项研究符合入选标准,其中19项为随机对照试验。这些研究共纳入1683例患者;827例参加了CRP,855例未接受干预。中位年龄为58岁。两组在年龄、合并症、冠心病严重程度、基线EF或HR方面无显著差异。纳入数据的荟萃分析表明,CRP患者干预后的静息HR低于未接受CRP的患者(SMD:-0.59;95%CI:-0.73至-0.46,固定效应模型,P<0.05)。与对照组相比,CRP后EF%显著改善(SMD:0.21;95%CI:0.02至0.40,P = 0.03)。CRP使峰值VO显著改善(SMD:1.00;95%CI:0.56至1.45;P<0.0001)。CRP患者的LVEDV显著更低(SMD:-0.31;95%CI:-0.59至-0.02,固定效应模型,P<0.05)。CRP患者的WMSI显著更低(SMD:-0.41;95%CI:-0.78至-0.05,P = 0.024)。CRP可改善MI后患者的心脏功能。这可能解释了所报道的这些患者功能和死亡率的改善情况。进一步的随机试验可能有助于评估CRP的长期益处。