Lydakis C, Momen A, Blaha C, Gugoff S, Gray K, Herr M, Leuenberger U A, Sinoway L I
Division of Cardiology, Heart and Vascular Institute, Hershey Medical Center, Penn State University, Hershey, PA 17033, USA.
J Hum Hypertens. 2008 May;22(5):320-8. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2008.4. Epub 2008 Feb 14.
Chronic dynamic (aerobic) exercise decreases central arterial stiffness, whereas chronic resistance exercise evokes the opposite effect. Nevertheless, there is little information available on the effects of acute bouts of exercise. Also, there is limited data showing an increase of central arterial stiffness during acute mental stress. This study aimed to determine the effect of acute mental and physical (static and dynamic exercise) stress on indices of central arterial stiffness. Fifteen young healthy volunteers were studied. The following paradigms were performed: (1) 2 min of mental arithmetic, (2) short bouts (20 s) of static handgrip at 20 and 70% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), (3) fatiguing handgrip at 40% MVC and (4) incremental dynamic knee extensor exercise. Central aortic waveforms were assessed using SphygmoCor software. As compared to baseline, pulse wave transit time decreased significantly for all four interventions indicating that central arterial stiffness increased. During fatiguing handgrip there was a fall in the ratio of peripheral to central pulse pressure from 1.69+/-0.02 at baseline to 1.56+/-0.05 (P<0.05). In the knee extensor protocol a non-significant trend for the opposite effect was noted. The augmentation index increased significantly during the arithmetic, short static and fatiguing handgrip protocols, whereas there was no change in the knee extensor protocol. We conclude that (1) during all types of acute stress tested in this study (including dynamic exercise) estimated central stiffness increased, (2) during static exercise the workload posed on the left ventricle (expressed as change in central pulse pressure) is relatively higher than that posed during dynamic exercise (given the same pulse pressure change in the periphery).
慢性动态(有氧运动)可降低中心动脉僵硬度,而慢性阻力运动则产生相反的效果。然而,关于急性运动发作的影响,几乎没有可用信息。此外,仅有有限的数据显示在急性精神应激期间中心动脉僵硬度会增加。本研究旨在确定急性精神和身体(静态和动态运动)应激对中心动脉僵硬度指标的影响。对15名年轻健康志愿者进行了研究。进行了以下实验范式:(1)2分钟的心算,(2)在最大自主收缩(MVC)的20%和70%时进行短时间(20秒)的静态握力,(3)在40%MVC时进行疲劳握力,以及(4)递增动态伸膝运动。使用SphygmoCor软件评估中心主动脉波形。与基线相比,所有四种干预措施的脉搏波传播时间均显著缩短,表明中心动脉僵硬度增加。在疲劳握力期间,外周与中心脉压之比从基线时的1.69±0.02降至1.56±0.05(P<0.05)。在伸膝实验中,观察到相反效果的非显著趋势。在算术、短时间静态和疲劳握力实验中,增强指数显著增加,而在伸膝实验中则没有变化。我们得出结论:(1)在本研究测试的所有类型的急性应激(包括动态运动)期间,估计的中心僵硬度增加;(2)在静态运动期间,左心室承受的工作量(以中心脉压变化表示)相对高于动态运动期间(假设外周脉压变化相同)。