Ittermann T; Clinical-Epidemiological Research, University Medicine Greifswald, Germany
Kaczmarek S; Obst A; Konemann R; Bahls M; Dorr M; Stubbe B; Heine A; Habedank D; Ewert R;

Scientific Reports. 14(1):5394, 2024 03 05. VI 1

Recently, the parameter internal work (IW) has been introduced as change
in oxygen uptake (VO2) between resting and unloading workload in
cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). The proportional IW (PIW) was
defined as IW divided by VO2 at peak exercise. A second option is to
calculate the PIW based on the workload [PIW (Watt)] by considering the
aerobic efficiency. The aim of our study was to investigate whether IW and
PIW differ between patients with and without pulmonary hypertension and
healthy controls. Our study population consisted of 580 patients and 354
healthy controls derived from the Study of Health in Pomerania. The PIW
was slightly lower in patients (14.2%) than in healthy controls (14.9%; p
= 0.030), but the PIW (Watt) was higher in patients (18.0%) than in the
healthy controls (15.9%; p = 0.001). Such a difference was also observed,
when considering only the submaximal workload up to the VAT (19.8% in
patients and 15.1% in healthy controls; p < 0.001). Since the PIW (Watt)
values were higher in patients with pulmonary hypertension, this marker
may serve as a useful CPET parameter in clinical practice. In contrast to
most of the currently used CPET parameters, the PIW does not require a
maximal workload for the patient. Further studies are needed to validate
the prognostic significance of the PIW.