The prognostic effect of multi-component cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in the modern era of statins and acute revascularisation remains controversial. Focusing on actual clinical practice, the aim was to evaluate the effect of CR on total mortality and other clinical endpoints after an acute coronary event. Structured review and meta-analysis. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), retrospective controlled cohort studies (rCCSs) and prospective controlled cohort studies (pCCSs) evaluating patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or mixed populations with coronary artery disease (CAD) were included, provided the index event was in 1995 or later. Out of n = 18,534 abstracts, 25 studies were identified for final evaluation (RCT: n = 1; pCCS: n = 7; rCCS: n = 17), including n = 219,702 patients (after ACS: n = 46,338; after CABG: n = 14,583; mixed populations: n = 158,781; mean follow-up: 40 months). Heterogeneity in design, biometrical assessment of results and potential confounders was evident. CCSs evaluating ACS patients showed a significantly reduced mortality for CR participants (pCCS: hazard ratio (HR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20–0.69; rCCS: HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49–0.84; odds ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.08–0.48), but the single RCT fulfilling Cardiac Rehabilitation Outcome Study (CROS) inclusion criteria showed neutral results. CR participation was also associated with reduced mortality after CABG (rCCS: HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.54–0.70) and in mixed CAD populations. CR participation after ACS and CABG is associated with reduced mortality even in the modern era of CAD treatment. However, the heterogeneity of study designs and CR programmes highlights the need for defining internationally accepted standards in CR delivery and scientific evaluation.

Background: Despite numerous studies and meta-analyses the prognostic effect of cardiac rehabilitation is still under debate. This update of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Outcome Study (CROS II) provides a contemporary and practice focused approach including only cardiac rehabilitation interventions based on published standards and core components to evaluate cardiac rehabilitation delivery and effectiveness in improving patient prognosis. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Randomised controlled trials and retrospective and prospective controlled cohort studies evaluating patients after acute coronary syndrome, coronary artery bypass grafting or mixed populations with coronary artery disease published until September 2018 were included. Results: Based on CROS inclusion criteria out of 7096 abstracts six additional studies including 8671 patients were identified (two randomised controlled trials, two retrospective controlled cohort studies, two prospective controlled cohort studies). In total, 31 studies including 228,337 patients were available for this meta-analysis (three randomised controlled trials, nine prospective controlled cohort studies, 19 retrospective controlled cohort studies; 50,653 patients after acute coronary syndrome 14,583, after coronary artery bypass grafting 163,101, mixed coronary artery disease populations; follow-up periods ranging from 9 months to 14 years). Heterogeneity in design, cardiac rehabilitation delivery, biometrical assessment and potential confounders was considerable. Controlled cohort studies showed a significantly reduced total mortality (primary endpoint) after cardiac rehabilitation participation in patients after acute coronary syndrome (prospective controlled cohort studies: hazard ratio (HR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20–0.69; retrospective controlled cohort studies HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.53–0.76; prospective controlled cohort studies odds ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.08–0.48), but the single randomised controlled trial fulfilling the CROS inclusion criteria showed neutral results. Cardiac rehabilitation participation was also associated with reduced total mortality in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting (retrospective controlled cohort studies HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.54–0.70, one single randomised controlled trial without fatal events), and in mixed coronary artery disease populations (retrospective controlled cohort studies HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36–0.77; two out of 10 controlled cohort studies with neutral results). Conclusion: CROS II confirms the effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation participation after acute coronary syndrome and after coronary artery bypass grafting in actual clinical practice by reducing total mortality under the conditions of current evidence-based coronary artery disease treatment. The data of CROS II, however, underscore the urgent need to define internationally accepted minimal standards for cardiac rehabilitation delivery as well as for scientific evaluation.

Background: Telerehabilitation can contribute to the maintenance of successful rehabilitation regardless of location and time. The aim of this study was to investigate a specific three-month interactive telerehabilitation routine regarding its effectiveness in assisting patients with physical functionality and with returning to work compared to typical aftercare. Objective: The aim of the study was to investigate a specific three-month interactive telerehabilitation with regard to effectiveness in functioning and return to work compared to usual aftercare. Methods: From August 2016 to December 2017, 111 patients (mean 54.9 years old; SD 6.8; 54.3% female) with hip or knee replacement were enrolled in the randomized controlled trial. At discharge from inpatient rehabilitation and after three months, their distance in the 6-minute walk test was assessed as the primary endpoint. Other functional parameters, including health related quality of life, pain, and time to return to work, were secondary endpoints. Results: Patients in the intervention group performed telerehabilitation for an average of 55.0 minutes (SD 9.2) per week. Adherence was high, at over 75%, until the 7th week of the three-month intervention phase. Almost all the patients and therapists used the communication options. Both the intervention group (average difference 88.3 m; SD 57.7; P=.95) and the control group (average difference 79.6 m; SD 48.7; P=.95) increased their distance in the 6-minute-walk-test. Improvements in other functional parameters, as well as in quality of life and pain, were achieved in both groups. The higher proportion of working patients in the intervention group (64.6%; P=.01) versus the control group (46.2%) is of note. Conclusions: The effect of the investigated telerehabilitation therapy in patients following knee or hip replacement was equivalent to the usual aftercare in terms of functional testing, quality of life, and pain. Since a significantly higher return-to-work rate could be achieved, this therapy might be a promising supplement to established aftercare. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00010009; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do? navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00010009

In the last decade, transcatheter aortic valve implantation has become a promising treatment modality for patients with aortic stenosis and a high surgical risk. Little is known about influencing factors of function and quality of life during multicomponent cardiac rehabilitation. From October 2013 to July 2015, patients with elective transcatheter aortic valve implantation and a subsequent inpatient cardiac rehabilitation were enrolled in the prospective cohort multicentre study. Frailty-Index (including cognition, nutrition, autonomy and mobility), Short Form-12 (SF-12), six-minute walk distance (6MWD) and maximum work load in bicycle ergometry were performed at admission and discharge of cardiac rehabilitation. The relation between patient characteristics and improvements in 6MWD, maximum work load or SF-12 scales were studied univariately and multivariately using regression models. One hundred and thirty-six patients (80.6 ± 5.0 years, 47.8% male) were enrolled. 6MWD and maximum work load increased by 56.3 ± 65.3 m (p < 0.001) and 8.0 ± 14.9 watts (p < 0.001), respectively. An improvement in SF-12 (physical 2.5 ± 8.7, p = 0.001, mental 3.4 ± 10.2, p = 0.003) could be observed. In multivariate analysis, age and higher education were significantly associated with a reduced 6MWD, whereas cognition and obesity showed a positive predictive value. Higher cognition, nutrition and autonomy positively influenced the physical scale of SF-12. Additionally, the baseline values of SF-12 had an inverse impact on the change during cardiac rehabilitation. Cardiac rehabilitation can improve functional capacity as well as quality of life and reduce frailty in patients after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. An individually tailored therapy with special consideration of cognition and nutrition is needed to maintain autonomy and empower octogenarians in coping with challenges of everyday life.

Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) is an established alternative therapy in patients with severe aortic stenosis and a high surgical risk. Despite a rapid growth in its use, very few data exist about the efficacy of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in these patients. We assessed the hypothesis that patients after TAVI benefit from CR, compared to patients after surgical aortic-valve replacement (sAVR). From September 2009 to August 2011, 442 consecutive patients after TAVI (n = 76) or sAVR (n = 366) were referred to a 3-week CR. Data regarding patient characteristics as well as changes of functional (6-min walk test. 6-MWT), bicycle exercise test), and emotional status (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) were retrospectively evaluated and compared between groups after propensity score adjustment. Patients after TAVI were significantly older (p < 0.001), more female (p < 0.001), and had more often coronary artery disease (p = 0.027), renal failure (p = 0.012) and a pacemaker (p = 0.032). During CR, distance in 6-MWT (both groups p ≤ 0.001) and exercise capacity (sAVR p ≤ 0.001, TAVI p ≤ 0.05) significantly increased in both groups. Only patients after sAVR demonstrated a significant reduction in anxiety and depression (p ≤ 0.001). After propensity scores adjustment, changes were not significantly different between sAVR and TAVI, with the exception of 6-MWT (p = 0.004). Patients after TAVI benefit from cardiac rehabilitation despite their older age and comorbidities. CR is a helpful tool to maintain independency for daily life activities and participation in socio-cultural life.

Background: Although cardiovascular rehabilitation (CR) is well accepted in general, CR-attendance and delivery still considerably vary between the European countries. Moreover, clinical and prognostic effects of CR are not well established for a variety of cardiovascular diseases. Methods: The guidelines address all aspects of CR including indications, contents and delivery. By processing the guidelines, every step was externally supervised and moderated by independent members of the “Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany” (AWMF). Four meta-analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic effect of CR after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), after coronary bypass grafting (CABG), in patients with severe chronic systolic heart failure (HFrEF), and to define the effect of psychological interventions during CR. All other indications for CR-delivery were based on a predefined semi-structured literature search and recommendations were established by a formal consenting process including all medical societies involved in guideline generation. Results: Multidisciplinary CR is associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality in patients after ACS and after CABG, whereas HFrEF-patients (left ventricular ejection fraction <40%) especially benefit in terms of exercise capacity and health-related quality of life. Patients with other cardiovascular diseases also benefit from CR-participation, but the scientific evidence is less clear. There is increasing evidence that the beneficial effect of CR strongly depends on “treatment intensity” including medical supervision, treatment of cardiovascular risk factors, information and education, and a minimum of individually adapted exercise volume. Additional psychologic interventions should be performed on the basis of individual needs. Conclusions: These guidelines reinforce the substantial benefit of CR in specific clinical indications, but also describe remaining deficits in CR-delivery in clinical practice as well as in CR-science with respect to methodology and presentation.