Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 223

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Six-Minute Walk Test and Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: A Comparative Analysis on Clinical and Prognostic Insights

Open access
Guazzi, Marco, Dickstein, Kenneth, Vicenzi, Marco, Arena, Ross·2009·Circulation: Heart Failure

Abstract

Background— The six-minute walk test (6MWT) and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) are the 2 testing modalities most broadly used for assessing functional limitation in patients with heart failure (HF). A comprehensive comparison on clinical and prognostic validity of the 2 techniques has not been performed and is the aim of the present investigation. Methods and Results— Two hundred fifty-three patients diagnosed with systolic (n=211) or diastolic (n=42) HF (age: 61.9�10.1 years; New York Heart Association Class: 2.2�0.78) underwent a 6MWT and a symptom-limited CPET evaluation and were prospectively followed up. During the 4-year tracking period, there were 43 cardiac-related deaths with an annual cardiac mortality rate of 8.7%. The 6MWT distance correlated with CPET-derived variables (ie, peak V o 2 , V o 2 at anaerobic threshold, and V e /V co 2 slope) and was significantly reduced in proportion with lower peak V o 2 and higher V e /V co 2 slope classes and presence of an exercise oscillatory breathing (EOB) pattern ( P <0.01). However, no significant differences were observed in distance covered between survivors and nonsurvivors (353.2�95.8 m versus 338.5�76.4 m; P =NS). At univariate and multivariate Cox proportional analyses, the association of the 6MWT distance with survival was not significant either as a continuous or dicotomized variable (≤300 m). Conversely, CPET-derived variables emerged as prognostic with the strongest association found for EOB (systolic HF) and V e /V co 2 slope (entire population with HF and patients with a 6MWT≤300 m). Conclusions— The 6MWT is confirmed to be a simple and reliable first-line test for quantification of exercise intolerance in patients with HF. However, there is no supportive evidence for its use as a prognostic marker in alternative to or in conjunction with CPET-derived variables.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circheartfailure.109.881326

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 223

Metadata

Authors
Guazzi, M., Dickstein, K., Vicenzi, M., & Arena, R.
Venue
Circulation: Heart Failure
Published
2009-11
Volume
2
Issue
6
Pages
549-555
ISSN
  • 1941-3289 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-3297
OpenAlex
W2155366163
Cited by
223
References
2
FWCI
17.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.