Outcomes of a Cardiac Rehabilitation (CRH) Program after phase II: what about our patients almost 4 years later?

Abstract

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. INTRODUCTION CRH in patients with ischemic heart disease is recommended by the different clinical practice guidelines with an IA level of evidence, with an important role in reducing cardiovascular mortality and hospital readmissions during follow-up. OBJECTIVE The goal of this study is to show the 4-year clinical results of a population of patients who participated in an CRH program after an Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). METHODS Between May/2014 and September/2017, 221 patients who had recently presented an ACS completed the 12 weeks of phase II of the CRH program at our center. In May/2020 we collected epidemiological, clinical and echocardiographic information at the time of the acute cardiovascular event; and we evaluate the current vital status of the patients and the incidence of readmissions for: angina, HF, new ACS, or arrhythmic events. RESULTS Of the 221 patients, 182 were men (82%). The mean age of our population was 58.3 ± 7.8 years. 58% (129 patients) suffered from ST-elevation ACS. The mean time of hospital stay was 6.20 ± 2.9 days. An echocardiogram was performed at discharge, which showed an average LVEF of 56 ± 6%. Eight patients (4%) developed early Ventricular Fibrilation (VF) during the acute phase of ACS. Among the classic CVRF, smoking (79%) was the most prevalent, followed by dyslipidemia (53%) and hypertension (47%). The mean time from hospital discharge to the start of phase II RHC was 42 ± 16 days. The overall incidence of events was 9%: 10 patients suffered reinfarction during follow-up, and 7 were readmitted for unstable angina, all of whom underwent PCI; no patient was admitted for HF; and none of the 8 patients with early VF had a new tachyarrhythmia, registering a single admission for VT during follow-up. None of the patients had sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias during exercise-training. At the mean 4.5-year follow-up, 218 patients were still alive (98%). CONCLUSION The incidence of CV events in the follow-up of our cohort was low, which can be explained by the fact that it is a young population, with an LVEF at low limits of normality at discharge, which is one of the most important predictors in the prognosis after an ischemic event. As an improvement, we must shorten the time until the start of phase II of the program. CRH shows once again its clinical benefit after an ACS, in consonance with the existing evidence. Abstract Figure. Outcomes of a CRH program.