173
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Cardiopulmonary exercise test-based assessment of the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on the blood pressure response to exercise in patients with acute myocardial infarction during hospitalization

, , , , , , & show all
Pages 397-402 | Received 08 Feb 2022, Accepted 11 Mar 2022, Published online: 22 Mar 2022
 

ABSTRACT

Objective

To investigate the effects of sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) on cardiopulmonary function and blood pressure response to exercise during hospitalization in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) based on the cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET).

Methods

A total of 265 AMI patients were treated with either perindopril or S/V within 24 hours of admission. CPET was completed for all patients before discharge. There were 182 cases in the perindopril group and 83 cases in the S/V group.

Results

The proportion of exercise oscillatory ventilation (EOV) was higher in the S/V group than in the perindopril group (10.8% vs 1.6%, X2 = 11.148, P = .001). The resting heart rate (HR), resting diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and warm-up DBP were lower in the S/V group than in the perindopril group (P < .05). The resting systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 9.0 mmHg lower (115.7 ± 17.5 vs 106.7 ± 15.0, P < .001), the SBP during warm-up was 9.5 mmHg lower (124.8 ± 23.7 vs 115.3 ± 22.5,P = .002), the SBP at the anaerobic threshold (AT) was 10.5 mmHg lower (135.3 ± 24.8 vs 127.1 ± 25.1,P = .021),the SBP at max watts was 11.5 mmHg lower (148.9 ± 26.4 vs 137.4 ± 26.4,P = .001), and the SBP during one-minute recovery was 12.3 mmHg lower (146.5 ± 27.1 vs 134.2 ± 24.4, P = .001)in the S/V group than in the perindopril group. The S/V group had a higher oxygen ventilation equivalent and carbon dioxide ventilation equivalent (VE/VCO2) at AT and a lower oxygen uptake–work rate relationship during max watts (P < .05). The differences in the oxygen pulse, stroke volume, peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak), and VE/VCO2 slope were not statistically significant between the two groups.

Conclusion

Treatment with S/V was able to reduce the exercise blood pressure in patients with AMI during hospitalization, but did not significantly improve the VO2 peak, VE/VCO2 slope, or exercise tolerance.

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the hard and dedicated work of all the staff that implemented the intervention and evaluation components of the study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article. Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.