Is there an optimal dose of cardiac rehabilitation in coronary artery disease patients? - PubMed (original) (raw)
Is there an optimal dose of cardiac rehabilitation in coronary artery disease patients?
Martijn Scherrenberg et al. Int J Cardiol. 2021.
Abstract
Background: Many studies have shown that participation in cardiac rehabilitation reduces long-term morbidity and mortality after myocardial infarction. Therefore, both American and European evidence-based guidelines recommend cardiac rehabilitation. However, it is still unclear what the optimal dose of cardiac rehabilitation is.
Methodology: The study is a monocenter, retrospective cohort study. We identified patients with stable ischemic heart disease, who participated in at least one phase II center-based cardiac rehabilitation session between 2010 and 2015. A total of 609 patients were included in this study.
Results: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 609 patients. Statistically significant baseline differences between the four groups were observed for index coronary artery revascularization technique, age, dual antiplatelet therapy and smoking status. A total of number of 84 patients (13.8%) had a MACE in the four-year follow-up period. After adjustment for all significant predictors in the univariate analysis, patients who attended 36 or more sessions had a 47% lower risk of MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31 to 0.92), patients who attended 24 to 35 sessions had a 68% lower risk of MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15 to 0.67), patients who attended 12 to 23 sessions had a 56% lower risk of MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 to 0.92) than those who attended 1 to 11 sessions.
Conclusion: There is a clear clinical benefit from participating in more than 11 CR sessions. The best outcomes are achieved in patient who participated between 24 and 35 CR sessions. These results underline again the importance of improving participation and adherence to CR programmes in Europe.
Keywords: Acute coronary artery disease; Cardiac rehabilitation; Ischemic heart disease.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Competing Interest All the authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Similar articles
- Dose of Cardiac Rehabilitation to Reduce Mortality and Morbidity: A Population-Based Study.
Medina-Inojosa JR, Grace SL, Supervia M, Stokin G, Bonikowske AR, Thomas R, Lopez-Jimenez F. Medina-Inojosa JR, et al. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Oct 19;10(20):e021356. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.021356. Epub 2021 Oct 6. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021. PMID: 34612055 Free PMC article. - Relationship between cardiac rehabilitation and long-term risks of death and myocardial infarction among elderly Medicare beneficiaries.
Hammill BG, Curtis LH, Schulman KA, Whellan DJ. Hammill BG, et al. Circulation. 2010 Jan 5;121(1):63-70. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.876383. Epub 2009 Dec 21. Circulation. 2010. PMID: 20026778 Free PMC article. - Effect of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation on clinical outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction in the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease (MINOCA).
He CJ, Zhu CY, Zhu YJ, Zou ZX, Wang SJ, Zhai CL, Hu HL. He CJ, et al. Int J Cardiol. 2020 Sep 15;315:9-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.05.019. Epub 2020 May 19. Int J Cardiol. 2020. PMID: 32416201 Clinical Trial. - The prognostic effect of cardiac rehabilitation in the era of acute revascularisation and statin therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized studies - The Cardiac Rehabilitation Outcome Study (CROS).
Rauch B, Davos CH, Doherty P, Saure D, Metzendorf MI, Salzwedel A, Völler H, Jensen K, Schmid JP; ‘Cardiac Rehabilitation Section’, European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC), in cooperation with the Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI), Department of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, and the Cochrane Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group, Institute of General Practice, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany. Rauch B, et al. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016 Dec;23(18):1914-1939. doi: 10.1177/2047487316671181. Epub 2016 Oct 25. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016. PMID: 27777324 Free PMC article. Review. - The Birmingham Rehabilitation Uptake Maximisation Study (BRUM). Home-based compared with hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation in a multi-ethnic population: cost-effectiveness and patient adherence.
Jolly K, Taylor R, Lip GY, Greenfield S, Raftery J, Mant J, Lane D, Jones M, Lee KW, Stevens A. Jolly K, et al. Health Technol Assess. 2007 Sep;11(35):1-118. doi: 10.3310/hta11350. Health Technol Assess. 2007. PMID: 17767899 Review.
Cited by
- Current role and future perspectives of cardiac rehabilitation in coronary heart disease.
Vilela EM, Ladeiras-Lopes R, Joao A, Braga J, Torres S, Viamonte S, Ribeiro J, Teixeira M, Nunes JP, Fontes-Carvalho R. Vilela EM, et al. World J Cardiol. 2021 Dec 26;13(12):695-709. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v13.i12.695. World J Cardiol. 2021. PMID: 35070112 Free PMC article. Review. - Impact of Early COVID-19 Waves on Cardiac Rehabilitation Delivery in Australia: A National Survey.
Cartledge S, Thomas EE, Murphy B, Abell B, Verdicchio C, Zecchin R, Cameron J, Gallagher R, Astley C; ACRA; COVID working group. Cartledge S, et al. Heart Lung Circ. 2023 Mar;32(3):353-363. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2022.12.008. Epub 2023 Jan 14. Heart Lung Circ. 2023. PMID: 36646580 Free PMC article. - The role of cardiac rehabilitation in improving cardiovascular outcomes.
Taylor RS, Dalal HM, McDonagh STJ. Taylor RS, et al. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2022 Mar;19(3):180-194. doi: 10.1038/s41569-021-00611-7. Epub 2021 Sep 16. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2022. PMID: 34531576 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical