I don’t know if some people are familiar with the protocols used during those tests, and if they are different protocols.
Basically, I had to maintain a 50-65rpm on a stationary bike and every minute the power increased, until I can’t any more.
The stationary bike is you regular fitness one, with a a very standing position. Very difficult to engage the glutes.
So given the very low pedaling frequency (I’m used to 90+), and the bike position with only my quads were working, I stopped way below my max heart rate (165 vs 180+).
My legs were cooked, and I felt that I was testing my leg resistance rather than my cardiac fitness.
So I was disappointed that the cardiologist did not see how my heart behave in that high HR zone that I use at least once a week during group rides.
Any one else having done that stress test with a similar output ?
The cardio doc may have seen what he wanted with that protocol. Was it a screening test for CVD? Perhaps that’s enough stress to see that the pipes are clear and you don’t need further interventions at this time? Or do you have symptoms near your max HR that are concerning to you, that didn’t manifest during this test?
But I hear you, the running treadmill test would suck for me, and I’m not surprised the bike at the cardiologist is a joke. The usual cardio patient isn’t an athlete with high expectations on the gear.
I recently did the tread mill stress test and chose to bail a good bit earlier (by heart rate) than a stout bike workout. I don’t run and didn’t want to ruin my legs for days by pushing as long as I could. I asked how high a heart rate is needed for a good test and was surprised it was pretty low, at least by our standards in the training community. They are just looking for any potential changes between base line and stressed. 99% of the people taking stress tests don’t have any idea how far they can push, so they panic and bail early. But that’s still good enough because it still shows the heart pumping under stress.
Yes, just screening.
I guess you’re right. I did not know what to expect, but in my mind a stress test had to include some kind of test at the limits.
I’m wondering if this is some kind of calibration issue. I would not be surprised that it is tuned so that a regular person with a lower respiratory fitness would reach its true max HR.
Maybe, as an endurance athlete, I’m breaking this leg power vs endurance balance by having an under developed leg power compared to my cardio fitness…
I am not a cardiologist, so this is just me musing…
A max HR is really just a max under those circumstances, not a number that can be pinned down. I’ve heard of folks going through ablation where they are injected with adrenaline so the cardiologist can see where the afib is starting and zap that tissue. That direct injection gives them a hummingbird like HR. Probably they have never seen that HR in their training or racing because they just haven’t had a reason to ride hard enough to see that HR—like their life depended on it.
At Age 67, and nearly 10 yrs away from any intense training bicycling or otherwise, I talked my PC into a stress test. This was conducted as a progressive treadmill test. My legs quit long before my heart did as you describe. Fortunately they did a nuclear medicine perfusion test as part of the evaluation which showed no problems. My max pulse at the time was in the low 170’s, which 3 yrs later I never see.
Seems unusual for it to be done on a bike. Mine was on a treadmill, where they keep raising the incline and the speed is relatively slow. My legs were also in distress at the end because running at an 18% grade does that to most people, but I hit predicted max HR nonetheless.