These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Acute cardiac functional and mechanical responses to isometric exercise in prehypertensive males.
    Author: O'Driscoll JM, Taylor KA, Wiles JD, Coleman DA, Sharma R.
    Journal: Physiol Rep; 2017 Apr; 5(7):. PubMed ID: 28381447.
    Abstract:
    Isometric exercise (IE) training has been shown to reduce resting arterial blood pressure (ABP) in hypertensive, prehypertensive, and normotensive populations. However, the acute hemodynamic response of the heart to such exercise remains unclear. We therefore performed a comprehensive assessment of cardiac structure, function, and mechanics at rest and immediately post a single IE session in 26 male (age 44.8 ± 8.4 years) prehypertensive participants. Conventional echocardiography recorded standard and tissue Doppler measures of left ventricular (LV) structure and function. Speckle tracking echocardiography was used to measure LV global longitudinal, circumferential, and radial strain and strain rate. From this data, apical and basal rotation and rotational velocities, LV twist, systolic twist velocity, untwist velocity, and torsion were determined. IE led to a significant post exercise reduction in systolic (132.6 ± 5.6 vs. 109.4 ± 19.6 mmHg, P < 0.001) and diastolic (77.6 ± 9.4 vs. 58.8 ± 17.2 mmHg, P < 0.001) blood pressure, with no significant change in heart rate (62 ± 9.4 vs. 63 ± 7.5b·min-1, P = 0.63). There were significant reductions in LV end systolic diameter (3.4 ± 0.2 vs. 3.09 ± 0.3 cm, P = 0.002), LV posterior wall thickness (0.99 ± 0.1 vs. 0.9 ± 0.1 cm, P = 0.013), relative wall thickness (0.4 ± 0.06 vs. 0.36 ± 0.05, P = 0.027) estimated filling pressure (E/E' ratio 6.08 ± 1.87 vs. 5.01 ± 0.82, P = 0.006) and proportion of participants with LV concentric remodeling (30.8% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.035), and significant increases in LV ejection fraction (60.8 ± 3 vs. 68.3 ± 4%, P < 0.001), fractional shortening (31.6 ± 4.5 vs. 39.9 ± 5%, P < 0.001), cardiac output (4.3 ± 0.7 vs. 6.1 ± 1L·min-1, P < 0.001), and stroke volume (74.6 ± 11 vs. 96.3 ± 13.5 ml, P < 0.001). In this setting, there were significant increases in global longitudinal strain (-17.8 ± 2.4 vs. -20 ± 1.8%, P = 0.002) and strain rate (-0.88 ± 0.1 vs. -1.03 ± 0.1%, P < 0.001), basal rotation (-5 ± 3.5 vs. -7.22 ± 3.3°, P = 0.047), basal systolic rotational velocity (-51 ± 21.9 vs. -79.3 ± 41.3°·s-1, P = 0.01), basal diastolic rotational velocity (48.7 ± 18.9 vs. 62.3 ± 21.4°·s-1, P = 0.042), LV twist (10.4 ± 5.8 vs. 13.8 ± 5°, P = 0.049), systolic twist velocity (69.6 ± 27.5 vs. 98.8 ± 35.8°·s-1, P = 0.006), and untwist velocity (-64.2 ± 23 vs. -92.8 ± 38°·s-1, P = 0.007). These results suggest that IE improves LV function and mechanics acutely. This may in turn be partly responsible for the observed reductions in ABP following IE training programs and may have important implications for clinical populations.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]