Comparison of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Capacity in Patients with Atrial Septal Defect Treated with Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery or Transcatheter Closure

Aim. The main aim of our study was to compare the results of transcatheter atrial septal defect (ASD) closure versus minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) focusing on cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and echocardiographic findings preoperatively and 1 month after defect closure.Material and methods. 54 patients with ASD and finally 43 patients who were followed up were included in the study. 21 patients were in MICS (robotic or endoscopic approach) and 22 patients were in transcatheter closure arm. All patients investigated in detail by transesophageal echocardiography and underwent cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET). At the end of first month, CPET and transthorasic echocardiography were reperformed.Results. There was significant improvement of physical capacity after 1 month following the transcatheter closure procedure documented by exercise time and VO 2 max. Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) and tricuspid lateral annular systolic velocity (Tri S) were not changed. In surgery group right heart diameters declined significantly; but VO 2 max, TAPSE and Tri S significantly decreased.Conclusion. Cardiopulmonary exercise function is increased in transcatheter closure group 1 month after closure and contrary not in MICS group. This may be caused by long recovery time of the right ventricle after surgery. Device closure of ASD is preferable to surgical closure if the anatomy is suitable. However, MICS for ASD closure is safe, with short recovery period and less scarring.

Effects of surgical and FFP2/N95 face masks on cardiopulmonary exercise capacity

Background Due to the SARS-CoV2 pandemic, medical face masks are widely recommended for a large number of individuals and long durations. The effect of wearing a surgical and a FFP2/N95 face mask on cardiopulmonary exercise capacity has not been systematically reported. Methods This prospective cross-over study quantitated the effects of wearing no mask (nm), a surgical mask (sm) and a FFP2/N95 mask (ffpm) in 12 healthy males (age 38.1 ± 6.2 years, BMI 24.5 ± 2.0 kg/m2). The 36 tests were performed in randomized order. The cardiopulmonary and metabolic responses were monitored by ergo-spirometry and impedance cardiography. Ten domains of comfort/discomfort of wearing a mask were assessed by questionnaire. Results The pulmonary function parameters were significantly lower with mask (forced expiratory volume: 5.6 ± 1.0 vs 5.3 ± 0.8 vs 6.1 ± 1.0 l/s with sm, ffpm and nm, respectively; p = 0.001; peak expiratory flow: 8.7 ± 1.4 vs 7.5 ± 1.1 vs 9.7 ± 1.6 l/s; p < 0.001). The maximum power was 269 ± 45, 263 ± 42 and 277 ± 46 W with sm, ffpm and nm, respectively; p = 0.002; the ventilation was significantly reduced with both face masks (131 ± 28 vs 114 ± 23 vs 99 ± 19 l/m; p < 0.001). Peak blood lactate response was reduced with mask. Cardiac output was similar with and without mask. Participants reported consistent and marked discomfort wearing the masks, especially ffpm. Conclusion Ventilation, cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and comfort are reduced by surgical masks and highly impaired by FFP2/N95 face masks in healthy individuals. These data are important for recommendations on wearing face masks at work or during physical exercise.