Preston L Bell1, Edward T Kelley1, Stephanie M McCoy1, Daniel P Credeur2. 1. School of Kinesiology, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, 39406, USA. 2. School of Kinesiology, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, 39406, USA. daniel.credeur@usm.edu.
Abstract
Previous work has demonstrated a direct relationship between aerobic fitness and vasodilatory function (i.e., flow-mediated dilation; FMD); however, the relation between aerobic fitness and vasoconstrictor responsiveness (i.e., low flow-mediated constriction; L-FMC), and the overall vasoactive range (FMD + L-FMC) is unclear. PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that L-FMC and the overall vasoactive range (FMD + L-FMC) will be related to aerobic fitness in young, healthy men. METHODS: Twenty men (age: 23 ± 5 years) were recruited, and divided evenly into a higher (HF) vs. lower (LF) aerobic fitness group, quantified via YMCA cycle ergometry (VO2 peak extrapolation), and a 3-min step test (1-min heart rate recovery). Duplex Doppler-ultrasound was used to assess brachial artery FMD and L-FMC. RESULTS: Estimated VO2 peak (HF = 55 ± 10 vs. LF = 38 ± 5 mL/kg/min) and heart rate recovery (HF = 36 ± 10 vs. LF = 25 ± 8 beats) were greater in the HF group (P < 0.05). FMD and the vasoactive range were similar between groups; however, L-FMC was significantly greater in HF (HF = -2.5 ± 1.6 vs. LF = -0.7 ± 1.8%, P < 0.05; d = 1.18). A correlational analysis revealed an inverse relationship between L-FMC and both HR recovery (r = -0.665, P < 0.01) and estimated VO2 peak (r = -0.5, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This work supports an association between L-FMC and aerobic fitness in young, healthy men. Longitudinal or interventional studies are warranted to support causality, and to distinguish whether L-FMC is more sensitive to changes in aerobic fitness than FMD.
Previous work has demonstrated a direct relationship between aerobic fitness and vasodilatory function (i.e., flow-mediated dilation; FMD); however, the relation between aerobic fitness and vasoconstrictor responsiveness (i.e., low flow-mediated constriction; L-FMC), and the overall vasoactive range (FMD + L-FMC) is unclear. PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that L-FMC and the overall vasoactive range (FMD + L-FMC) will be related to aerobic fitness in young, healthy men. METHODS: Twenty men (age: 23 ± 5 years) were recruited, and divided evenly into a higher (HF) vs. lower (LF) aerobic fitness group, quantified via YMCA cycle ergometry (VO2 peak extrapolation), and a 3-min step test (1-min heart rate recovery). Duplex Doppler-ultrasound was used to assess brachial artery FMD and L-FMC. RESULTS: Estimated VO2 peak (HF = 55 ± 10 vs. LF = 38 ± 5 mL/kg/min) and heart rate recovery (HF = 36 ± 10 vs. LF = 25 ± 8 beats) were greater in the HF group (P < 0.05). FMD and the vasoactive range were similar between groups; however, L-FMC was significantly greater in HF (HF = -2.5 ± 1.6 vs. LF = -0.7 ± 1.8%, P < 0.05; d = 1.18). A correlational analysis revealed an inverse relationship between L-FMC and both HR recovery (r = -0.665, P < 0.01) and estimated VO2 peak (r = -0.5, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This work supports an association between L-FMC and aerobic fitness in young, healthy men. Longitudinal or interventional studies are warranted to support causality, and to distinguish whether L-FMC is more sensitive to changes in aerobic fitness than FMD.
Entities:
Keywords:
Aerobic; Cardiorespiratory; Low flow-mediated constriction; Vascular function
Authors: Ryan D Sheldon; Bruno T Roseguini; John P Thyfault; Brett D Crist; M H Laughlin; Sean C Newcomer Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2012-03-22
Authors: Matthew D Beekley; William F Brechue; Diego V deHoyos; Linda Garzarella; Galila Werber-Zion; Michael L Pollock Journal: Res Q Exerc Sport Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Jaume Padilla; Grant H Simmons; Shawn B Bender; Arturo A Arce-Esquivel; Jeffrey J Whyte; M Harold Laughlin Journal: Physiology (Bethesda) Date: 2011-06
Authors: Michel L Hijmering; Erik S G Stroes; Jobien Olijhoek; Barbara A Hutten; Peter J Blankestijn; Ton J Rabelink Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-02-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Mark Rakobowchuk; Emma Harris; Annabelle Taylor; Vivek Baliga; Richard M Cubbon; Harry B Rossiter; Karen M Birch Journal: Exp Physiol Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 2.969
Authors: Myles W O'Brien; Said Mekary; Susan A Robinson; Jarrett A Johns; Derek Stephen Kimmerly Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2018-12-10 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Patricia Pagan Lassalle; Adam J Palamar; Jacob P DeBlois; Wesley K Lefferts; Kevin S Heffernan Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2019-06-12 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Karsten Königstein; Jonathan Wagner; Denis Infanger; Raphael Knaier; Gilles Nève; Christopher Klenk; Justin Carrard; Timo Hinrichs; Arno Schmidt-Trucksäss Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-04-28