Abstract:Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) was limited to peak oxygen consumption analysis (VO2peak), and now the ventilation/carbon dioxide production (VE/VCO2) slope is recognized as having independent prognostic value. Unlike VO2peak, the VE/VCO2 slope does not require maximal effort, making it more feasible. There is no consensus on how to measure the VE/VCO2 slope; therefore, we assessed whether different methods affect its value. This is a retrospective study assessing sociodemographic data, left ventricular ejection fraction, CPET parameters, and indications of patients referred for CPET. The VE/VCO2 slope was measured to the first ventilatory threshold (VT1-slope), secondary threshold (VT2-slope), and included all test data (full-slope). Of the 697 CPETs analyzed, 308 reached VT2. All VE/VCO2 slopes increased with age, regardless of test indications. In patients not reaching VT2, the VT1-slope was 32 vs. 36 (p < 0.001) for the full-slope; in those surpassing VT2, the VT1-slope was 29 vs. 33 (p < 0.001) for the VT2-slope and 37 (all p < 0.001) for the full-slope. The mean difference between the submaximal and full-slopes was ±4 units, sufficient to reclassify patients from low to high risk for heart failure or pulmonary hypertension. We conclude that the method used for determining the VE/VCO2 slope greatly influences the result, the significant variations limiting its prognostic value. The calculation method must be standardized to improve its prognostic value.

How Does the Method Used to Measure the VE/VCO2 Slope Affect Its Value? A Cross-Sectional and Retrospective Cohort Study