Most Astrid, Groesser Vincent, Hoelscher Sophie, Weber Rebecca, Akdogan-Gernandt Ebru, Kraushaar Lutz, Dörr Oliver, Sedighi Jamschid, Keranov Stanislav, Husain-Syed Faeq, Hamm Christian W, Sossalla Samuel, Bauer Pascal
Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Justus Liebig University Giessen, 35390, Giessen, Germany.
Adiphea GmbH, Werbach, Germany.
Clin Res Cardiol. 2024 Dec 19. doi: 10.1007/s00392-024-02591-3.
The systolic blood pressure/workload (SBP/MET) slope was recently reported to reliably identify an exaggerated blood pressure response (eBPR) in the normal population and in athletes. We investigated whether the aortic root diameter (AoD) also correlates with an eBPR and vascular function in elite athletes.
We examined 652 healthy male elite athletes (age 25.8 ± 5 years) of mixed sports with a standardized maximum exercise test. Central blood pressure and vascular function were measured non-invasively with a validated oscillometric device. The SBP/MET slope was calculated and the threshold for an eBPR was set at > 6.2 mmHg/MET. Two groups were defined (≤ 6.2 and > 6.2 mmHg/MET), and an association between AoD and vascular function with the SBP/MET slope was evaluated for each group.
Athletes with an eBPR (n = 191, 29%) displayed a higher systolic central BP (103 ± 7.7 vs. 101 ± 9.2 mmHg, p = 0.004), larger AoD (32.8 ± 3.3 vs. 31.9. ± 3.2 mm, p < 0.001), a higher AoD/left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) ratio (0.62 ± 0.061 vs. 0.59. ± 0.056, p < 0.001), a lower LVEDD/AoD ratio (1.64 ± 0.16 vs. 1.69. ± 0.16, p < 0.001), and a lower absolute (299 ± 59 vs. 379 ± 65 W, p < 0.001) and relative workload (3.17 ± 0.55 vs. 4.05 ± 1.2 W/kg, p < 0.001) vs. athletes with a normal SBP/MET slope (n = 461, 71%). No differences between the two groups were found after indexing AoD to body surface area (BSA) (14.76 ± 1.36 vs. 14.73 ± 1.41, p = 0.772).
Athletes with eBPR displayed altered AoD/LVEDD and LVEDD/AoD ratios, whereas AoD/BSA indexing was not different. Further longitudinal studies are encouraged to explore these metrics and their role in aortic remodeling of athletes.
最近有报道称,收缩压/工作量(SBP/MET)斜率能够可靠地识别正常人群和运动员中存在的血压过度反应(eBPR)。我们研究了主动脉根部直径(AoD)是否也与精英运动员的eBPR和血管功能相关。
我们对652名年龄在25.8±5岁的混合项目健康男性精英运动员进行了标准化的最大运动测试。使用经过验证的示波装置无创测量中心血压和血管功能。计算SBP/MET斜率,并将eBPR的阈值设定为>6.2 mmHg/MET。定义了两组(≤6.2和>6.2 mmHg/MET),并评估了每组中AoD和血管功能与SBP/MET斜率之间的关联。
与SBP/MET斜率正常的运动员(n = 461,71%)相比,存在eBPR的运动员(n = 191,29%)的收缩期中心血压更高(103±7.7 vs. 101±9.2 mmHg,p = 0.004),AoD更大(32.8±3.3 vs. 31.9±3.2 mm,p < 0.001),AoD/左心室舒张末期内径(LVEDD)比值更高(0.62±0.061 vs. 0.59±0.056,p < 0.001),LVEDD/AoD比值更低(1.64±0.16 vs. 1.69±0.16,p < 0.001),绝对工作量(299±59 vs. 379±65 W,p < 0.001)和相对工作量更低(3.17±0.55 vs. 4.05±1.2 W/kg,p < 0.001)。将AoD按体表面积(BSA)进行指数化后,两组之间未发现差异(14.76±1.36 vs. 14.73±1.41,p = 0.772)。
存在eBPR的运动员的AoD/LVEDD和LVEDD/AoD比值发生了改变,而AoD/BSA指数化没有差异。鼓励进一步开展纵向研究,以探索这些指标及其在运动员主动脉重塑中的作用。