Roberto Sala1,2, Mara Malacarne2,3, Massimo Pagani1, Daniela Lucini4,5. 1. University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 2. Exercise Medicine Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Via Alessandro Manzoni, 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 3. Biometra Department, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 4. Exercise Medicine Unit, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Via Alessandro Manzoni, 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. daniela.lucini@unimi.it. 5. Biometra Department, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. daniela.lucini@unimi.it.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Aerobic fitness seems to provide extra protection to the cardiovascular system beyond changing the traditional risk factors, a phenomenon referred to as the risk factor gap model. Aerobic fitness may possibly lead to improved autonomic regulation. The Task Force of the American Heart Association supports a national campaign to reach specific cardiovascular health goals considering various metrics, including recommended physical activity (PA) volumes. It may be clinically relevant to assess whether autonomic remodeling occurs in those who adhere to the PA recommendations. METHODS: We studied 39 healthy subjects (22 males and 17 females), subdivided into two groups, according to whether they were meeting or not meeting PA recommendations (150 min/week of moderate aerobic activity, or 75 min/week of vigorous aerobic activity, or a combination of both). For each group, we evaluated aerobic capacity (VO2 Peak), body composition (Fat Mass) and autonomic nervous system profile, by way of mono and bivariate spectral analysis of cardiovascular beat by beat variability. RESULTS: Subjects following PA recommendations show higher RR period, higher RR variance, greater absolute power of the respiratory component of RR variability (HFRR) and higher index alpha (a measure of spontaneous baroreflex). Moreover, as expected, the group that was meeting or exceeding current PA recommendations had higher VO2 peak, less fat mass and greater weekly energy expenditure. CONCLUSION: Data show that subjects meeting current PA recommendations present a phenotype suggestive of enhanced parasympathetic drive to the SA node. This finding is compatible with the hypothesis that a more favorable autonomic profile is part of the mechanisms of the risk factor gap.
INTRODUCTION:Aerobic fitness seems to provide extra protection to the cardiovascular system beyond changing the traditional risk factors, a phenomenon referred to as the risk factor gap model. Aerobic fitness may possibly lead to improved autonomic regulation. The Task Force of the American Heart Association supports a national campaign to reach specific cardiovascular health goals considering various metrics, including recommended physical activity (PA) volumes. It may be clinically relevant to assess whether autonomic remodeling occurs in those who adhere to the PA recommendations. METHODS: We studied 39 healthy subjects (22 males and 17 females), subdivided into two groups, according to whether they were meeting or not meeting PA recommendations (150 min/week of moderate aerobic activity, or 75 min/week of vigorous aerobic activity, or a combination of both). For each group, we evaluated aerobic capacity (VO2 Peak), body composition (Fat Mass) and autonomic nervous system profile, by way of mono and bivariate spectral analysis of cardiovascular beat by beat variability. RESULTS: Subjects following PA recommendations show higher RR period, higher RR variance, greater absolute power of the respiratory component of RR variability (HFRR) and higher index alpha (a measure of spontaneous baroreflex). Moreover, as expected, the group that was meeting or exceeding current PA recommendations had higher VO2 peak, less fat mass and greater weekly energy expenditure. CONCLUSION: Data show that subjects meeting current PA recommendations present a phenotype suggestive of enhanced parasympathetic drive to the SA node. This finding is compatible with the hypothesis that a more favorable autonomic profile is part of the mechanisms of the risk factor gap.
Authors: Haitham M Ahmed; Michael J Blaha; Khurram Nasir; Juan J Rivera; Roger S Blumenthal Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2011-10-18 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Yuling Hong; Darwin Labarthe; Dariush Mozaffarian; Lawrence J Appel; Linda Van Horn; Kurt Greenlund; Stephen Daniels; Graham Nichol; Gordon F Tomaselli; Donna K Arnett; Gregg C Fonarow; P Michael Ho; Michael S Lauer; Frederick A Masoudi; Rose Marie Robertson; Véronique Roger; Lee H Schwamm; Paul Sorlie; Clyde W Yancy; Wayne D Rosamond Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: William L Haskell; I-Min Lee; Russell R Pate; Kenneth E Powell; Steven N Blair; Barry A Franklin; Caroline A Macera; Gregory W Heath; Paul D Thompson; Adrian Bauman Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Scott J Strath; Leonard A Kaminsky; Barbara E Ainsworth; Ulf Ekelund; Patty S Freedson; Rebecca A Gary; Caroline R Richardson; Derek T Smith; Ann M Swartz Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-10-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Myles W O'Brien; Jarrett A Johns; Tristan W Dorey; Ryan J Frayne; Jonathon R Fowles; Said Mekary; Derek S Kimmerly Journal: Clin Auton Res Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 4.435