1Department of Clinical Epidemiology, University of Oslo, Akershus University Hospital, PO Box 75, NO-1474 Nordbyhagen, Norway
2Hjerteavdelingen, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
3Department of Cardiology, Ulleval University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
4The Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
Received 29 November 2004; revised 7 March 2005; accepted 18 March 2005; online publish-ahead-of-print 26 April 2005.
* Corresponding author. Tel: +47 67927806; fax: +47 67927803. E-mail address: l.j.bodegard{at}klinmed.uio.no
See page 1353 for the editorial comment on this article (doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehi303)
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Methods and results During 197275, 2014 men aged 4059, free from somatic diseases and not using drugs, underwent an examination programme including case history, clinical examination, various blood tests, and a symptom limited exercise ECG-test. The following reasons for test termination were noted: impaired breathing, lower limb fatigue, exhaustion (=combined lower limb fatigue and impaired breathing), high heart rate, abnormal blood pressure response, heart arrhythmias, increasing chest pain during exercise, marked ST-depressions during the test, and refusal to continue. Follow-up was 26 years. When adjusting for age, men who stopped exercising exclusively because of impaired breathing (n=178) had a 1.86-fold increased risk (95% CI 1.342.60; P=0.0002) of dying from coronary heart disease (CHD), a 1.64-fold increased risk (95% CI 1.322.03; P<0.0001) of dying from any cause, and a 3.47-fold increased risk (95% CI 2.245.12; P<0.0001) of dying from pulmonary causes compared with men having defined exhaustion (n=1376). After adjustment for age, smoking, total serum cholesterol, fasting blood glucose, systolic blood pressure, and physical fitness, impaired breathing remained significantly associated to an increased risk of dying from CHD, pulmonary disease, or any causes.
Conclusion Healthy men who stop bicycle exercising only because of impaired breathing have a high long-term CHD-, pulmonary-, and total-mortality, and such men may need further diagnostic scrutiny and follow-up.
Key Words: Long term prognosis Exercise testing Coronary heart disease mortality Termination reason Pulmonary disease mortality Total mortality
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Symptom limited exercise testing in healthy subjects is a safe procedure, provided acknowledged contraindications are respected and the test is terminated according to current guidelines.1 In apparently healthy subjects, the majority of the tests are terminated either by the patient or by the physician, because of impaired breathing/dyspnoea, lower limb muscular fatigue, and exhaustion or, for safety reasons, solely because of very high heart rates. A few tests may reveal findings which suggest that an apparently healthy man undergoing exercise testing may not be entirely healthy. Thus, some tests have to be terminated for clinical reasons such as arrhythmias, suspected angina pectoris, or development of marked ST changes in the exercise ECG.
The aim of the present study is to analyse whether various reasons for terminating exercise have a different influence on long-term total and/or cardiac mortality. To our knowledge, this aspect of exercise testing has not been reported previously. The population studied consists of 2014 men aged 4059, initially judged to be apparently healthy. All underwent a symptom limited exercise test between 1972 and 1975. Follow-up on mortality was on an average 26 years.
![]() |
Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
All men underwent the same examination programme, always in the same order as reported earlier.7 In brief, the men arrived at 07.00 AM after 12 h fasting and at least 8 h of abstinence from smoking. The examination programme included height/weight measurements, spirography, chest X-ray, a number of blood tests, a comprehensive case history, clinical examination, phonocardiography, resting 12-lead ECG, and a symptom limited bicycle exercise ECG test. As part of the case history, all answered a comprehensive health questionnaire in which the MRC respiratory questionnaire was included.8
Exercise ECG testing
Exercise testing was conducted on an electrically braked Elema bicycle. The starting load was 600 k.p.m. (100 W), and the load was increased by 300 k.p.m. (
50 W) every 6 min.
Blood pressure was measured at 1, 3, and 5 min on all loads, besides immediately prior to test termination, using a mercury sphygmomanometer. Readings were made to the nearest 5 mmHg.
The test leader (J.E.) was present during all tests, and encouraged all test subjects to exercise as long as they tolerated. The test was continued until a subject refused to continue, or as long as the attending physician felt it safe. Often more than one of the reasons for test termination were reached simultaneously (discussed subsequently).
Physical fitness was defined as working capacity divided by body weight, with working capacity defined as the cumulated work performed at test termination as reported earlier.4
The exercise ECGs were monitored continuously during the test and were registered at 2, 4, and 6 min on all loads, at test termination and at 030 s and at 1, 3, and 5 min post-exercise. ECGs were read as described earlier.9
Reasons for terminating exercise: definitions
Impaired breathing (Group I)
Lower limb fatigue (Group II)
Lower limb fatigue was said to be present if the test leader observed marked difficulties in further pedalling and/or if a test subject claimed that he was unable to pedal further because of lower limb tiredness (none had coordination difficulties in pedalling).
Exhaustion (Group III)
Exhaustion was said to be present if a subject had developed both impaired breathing and lower limb fatigue, when the test had to be stopped. For safety reasons, some subjects were stopped only because of high heart rate according to the following rule: provided heart rate at the end of one load had reached 90% of maximal predicted heart rate (MPHR) according to the formula: MPHR=(220age) (b.p.m.), a final load of 50 W was added. However, if this load was also completed without developing any other specified reason for terminating the test, no further load was added regardless of heart rate response. These subjects were included in the exhaustion group.
Other reasons (Group IV)
Angina pectoris
Retrosternal chest pain [with or without radiation to the arm(s), jaw, back, or upper abdomen] developing during the test, increasing gradually as the test continued and eventually forcing the test subject to stop exercising. A necessary pre-requisite was also that the pain gradually vanished within a few minutes of test termination. (NB: None had a diagnosis of known or suspected angina pectoris prior to participating in the survey.)
Heart arrhythmias
A variety of arrhythmias or conduction disturbances was anticipated. However, the only arrhythmias observed necessitating test termination were supraventricular tachycardia, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation/flutter, or observation on the ECG monitor of three or more rapid, consecutive ventricular extrasystoles four or more times within 1 min on one load.
Marked ST-depression during exercise
If an ST-depression 3 mm 0.08 s from the J-point was observed on the monitor (and confirmed on the ECG) during exercise, the test was always stopped for safety reasons.
Miscellaneous reasons
Were any reason given by the test subjects. However, almost exclusively these men stopped suddenly on one of the lower loads after claiming I do not want to continue, without further justification.
High systolic blood pressure
The test was stopped for safety reasons if a blood pressure of 300 mmHg was reached, because the top of the mercury scale of the sphygmomanometer was 300 mmHg.
Systolic blood pressure drop
A drop to <75% of the highest blood pressure measured earlier during the test.
A special note was made on whether subjects in groups IIII had reached 90% of their MPHR, and/or had an ST-depression in the exercise ECG of
0.50 mm.10
Follow-up procedures
With permission from the Norwegian Data Inspectorate and the Norwegian Board of Health, a complete cause-specific survey of all deaths in the material was obtained from Statistics Norway. Mortality data are complete up to 31 December 1999, except for two men who had moved abroad and were lost to follow-up after 1995.
Earlier, in 1995, the study group performed a nationwide search for a number of hospital verified disease events for all subjects, in all Norwegian hospitals. Relevant morbidity data are complete up to 31 December 1994. The only morbidity data included in the present report are:
Statistical methods
Differences in baseline data between groups were tested by Students t-test, Fisher's exact test, and Wilcoxon test according to data type. When comparing data between the groups, our P-values are two-tailed and are considered significant if P<0.05.
The risk of mortality and morbidity events was estimated by KaplanMeier plots and tested with log-rank test (MantelCox test). When calculating relative risk by including further covariates, Cox proportional-hazards modelling was used. The Cox model included variables earlier identified as important prognostic factors.2,4 Diagnostic plots of log S(t) vs. log(t) indicated that the proportional hazard assumption was acceptable. The linearity assumptions were tested by evaluating regression results with the variables split into categories. When testing for the prognostic information contained in the reasons for terminating the exercise test, the overall significance of the three-category variable was tested before comparing the impaired breathing and the lower limb fatigue categories to the exhaustion group (the reference group).
All models were computed using the StatViewTM computer package version 5.0 for Windows.11
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Group I comprises the 178 men who stopped exercising because of impaired breathing; group II, the 369 men who stopped because of lower limb fatigue; group III, the 1376 men who stopped because of exhaustion; and group IV, the 91 men who stopped exercising for other reasons.
In groups I, II, and III, there were 64, 137, and 221, respectively, who did not reach 90% of their MPHR.
Table 1 presents various clinical, physiological, and laboratory data in groups IIII. Some differences seem worth noting: men from group I were older, were more often smokers, had higher resting systolic blood pressure, had lower maximal heart rate, poorer physical fitness, and had a higher frequency of ST-depressions 0.50 mm10 than men in group III. Men from group II were in most respects similar to men from group III, except for reaching a lower maximal heart rate and a lower rate of exercise ECG ST-depression
0.5 mm.
|
26 years crude mortality data
Table 2 shows that mortality in groups II and III are strikingly similar: both groups had a 26 years total mortality of approximately one-third and a death rate from pulmonary causes (combined pulmonary carcinoma, asthma/emphysema, chronic obstructive lung disease, or pneumonias) of 5%. In contrast, group I had a significantly higher both CHD-, pulmonary-, and all-cause-mortality.
|
Figure 1 shows the 26 years survival curves (KaplanMeier) for groups IIII. Groups II and III have virtually identical total mortality over the total observation period, whereas group I has a markedly higher mortality (P<0.0001).The sequential group IV-mortality follows mortality in group I closely (detailed data not shown).
|
|
First severe CHD-event (21.5 years follow-up)
The men from group I had a 1.56-fold increased age adjusted risk (95% CI 1.251.96; P<0.0001) of having one first, severe CHD-event over a follow-up period of 21.5 years. A severe event was defined as having had a first non-fatal, hospital verified myocardial infarction, a coronary bypass operation, or primary death from CHD during a follow-up period of 21.5 years; no case was counted twice (Table 4).
|
|
|
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Our data strongly indicate that it is prognostically important why an exercise test has to be stopped. Because exhaustion, defined as the combination of marked muscular fatigue preventing further pedalling and impaired breathing, may be regarded as the most normal reason for stopping exercising, we compared the outcome of such subjects with those who stopped for other reasons.
Apart from reaching a lower maximal heart rate, those who stopped because of lower limb fatigue (group II) resembled the exhaustion group (group III) in almost all respects, both regarding all other baseline findings and all mortality figures. In contrast, men who stopped only because of perceived or observed breathing difficulties demonstrated significantly higher CHD-, pulmonary-, and total-mortality. Thus, impaired breathing as the main reason for having to stop an exercise test was an ominous finding when not part of an exhaustion syndrome. Importantly, this holds true whether this was a subjective phenomenon (dyspnoea) or an objective observation made by the test leader causing him to terminate the test for safety reasons.
Conceivably, part of these mortality differences might be related to differences in baseline characteristics. Thus, men from group I were slightly older than men in group III, and were also more often smokers, had higher blood pressure, poorer physical fitness, lower FEV1, and lower maximal heart rate than men in group III.
However, after adjusting for a number of acknowledged confounders,2,4 including age, smoking, systolic blood pressure, fasting blood glucose, and also for physical fitness, the negative prognostic impact of impaired breathing persisted.
Although a high heart rate at exercise test termination is considered a beneficial prognostic finding,1 it was not a protective finding among those who stopped exercising because of impaired breathing, but appeared so in the exhaustion group (detailed data not shown).
Importantly, on inclusion none had a diagnosis of asthma, only a minority had an FEV1 below 2.5 L, few had electrocardiographical signs of left ventricular hypertrophy, left axis deviation or an enlarged heart (>500 mL/m2 in relative heart volume), and none had pulmonary congestion on their chest X-ray (detailed data not shown).
It is somewhat surprising that dyspnoea, a poorly quantifiable symptom or sign, has such a negative prognostic importance even after adjustment for a number of relevant risk factors. It is also surprising that the exercise test and the MRC questionnaire seem to define different populations.
The possible explanations for our findings are purely conjectural but two explanations seem reasonable: first, the high mortality from pulmonary causes suggests that previously unknown/undiagnosed pulmonary diseases were unveiled by the exercise test. Next, the finding of a combined high 26 years CHD mortality and a significantly increased 21.5 years incidence of first, severe CHD events further suggest that a proportion of those who stopped because of impaired breathing in fact may have had to stop because of atypical angina (angina equivalent). Thus, it is likely that the impaired breathing group contained a fairly high number of men with previously unrecognized pulmonary and/or CHD, revealed by the exercise test, earlier unrecognized and unsuspected because of few or lacking symptoms and signs at rest. The high prevalence of ST-depression>0.5 mm in the exercise ECG in group I may also point in the same direction.10
Unrecognized heart failure is an unlikely explanation because heart volume was normal in most subjects and they lacked pulmonary congestion on the chest X-rays. However, we have no data to further substantiate this notion.
We initially tried to introduce the Borg scale during the testing, but it proved of little value for our purpose and was, therefore, abandoned. However, to our knowledge, none has reported prognostic importance of the Borg scale scoring, and moreover, this scale provides a composite figure embracing all sorts of discomfort.
One might claim that studying respiratory symptoms during a bicycle exercise test is cumbersome, probably poorly reproducible and hardly more informative than, for instance, the MRC respiratory questionnaire.8 However, whereas an almost identical number of men stopped exercising because of impaired breathing or answered affirmative to the MRC questionnaire, there was only a minor overlap between the two groups (25%). The reason for this is unclear.
Otherwise, our findings confirm the previous literature such as observing a negative impact of being unable to reach 90% of maximal predicted heart rate, having a low fitness, developing a previously undiagnosed angina pectoris during the test, having an ST-depression >3 mm, and developing various arrythmias. However, the high total mortality among those 37 in group IV who stopped exercising just because they did not want to continue came as a surprise. It was initially assumed that they had cooperated poorly, but the data suggest alternative explanations. Possibly, some of them had a feeling that something was wrong (and that it was unwise to continue exercising).
Accordingly, our data indicate that registering the reasons why a test subject wants to (or has to) stop exercising may provide additional information to studying the exercise ECG and standard physiological data obtained during the test. Although too cumbersome for general use during exercise testing, more advanced cardiopulmonary tests may be advocated among apparently healthy men who stop exercising solely because of dyspnoea.
Strengths of the study
Data have been collected prospectively, following a protocol of standardized examinations. All exercise tests were performed by the same test leader (J.E.). The number of subjects is large, the follow-up is long, and there is a high number of events. Apart from lacking a few fasting blood glucose values, data are complete, including follow-up mortality, and morbidity. Thus, we have no work-up bias. The findings show low P-values.
Limitations of the study
We have no baseline repeatibility data on reasons for exercise termination, but a baseline testretest of the exercise ECG response in 10% of the material showed that 90% had a repeat working capacity within 5% of the first test results and within 10% in the remaining ones.7
The data are limited to apparently healthy men from a country with a high CHD prevalence. Moreover, the data cannot be extrapolated to age <40 years or >60 years in men, and not to women.
Whereas physiological variables like maximal heart rate, physical fitness, etc. can be measured accurately and repeatably, one might claim that both impaired breathing and lower limb fatigue are subjective when expressed as symptoms by the test subjects or signs by the test leader. Inter-observer and intra-observer variation may be large, and hence, the present data must be accepted with caution until repeated by others.12
Baseline variables, on which the statistical analyses may be based, often show sequential changes. We have, for example, shown that physical fitness13 and smoking habits14 change markedly in a sizeable proportion of the present participants over a period of 8 years. The size and direction of such changes may have an important impact on the further course in the study population. The overall effect of such sequential changes may be difficult to assess.
Our test results refer to symptom limited tests and not to defined maximal exercise tests. Because most men who reached our upper high heart rate limit appeared able to exercise further had they not been stopped by the test leader, the inclusion of these men in the exhaustion group may probably have led to a slight underestimation of group contrasts in fitness and maximal heart rate.
The blood pressure criteria for stopping exercising may also be criticized although all subjects where persumed to be healthy.
Finally, data from treadmill and bicycle tests should be compared with caution.
![]() |
Conclusion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Related articles in EHJ: