Flavio D'Ascenzi1, Francesca Anselmi2, Pietro Piu3, Caterina Fiorentini2, Salvatore Francesco Carbone4, Luca Volterrani4, Marta Focardi2, Marco Bonifazi3, Sergio Mondillo2. 1. Department of Medical Biotechnologies, Division of Cardiology, University of Siena, Siena, Italy. Electronic address: flavio.dascenzi@unisi.it. 2. Department of Medical Biotechnologies, Division of Cardiology, University of Siena, Siena, Italy. 3. Department of Medicine, Surgery, and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena, Italy. 4. Unit of Diagnostic Imaging, University Hospital Santa Maria alle Scotte, Siena, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this meta-analysis was to derive normal reference values of biventricular size and function estimated by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in competitive athletes. BACKGROUND: Exercise-induced enlargement of cardiac chambers is commonly observed in competitive athletes. However, ventricular dilatation is also a common phenotypic expression of life-threatening cardiomyopathies. The use of CMR for the exclusion of pathology is growing. However, normal reference values have not been established for athletes. METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic review of English-language studies in the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases investigating biventricular size and function by CMR in athletes. Athletes were divided into endurance, combined, and mixed groups according to the sport practiced. The potential impact of training volume was also evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies and 983 competitive athletes were included for CMR quantification of biventricular size and function. In this review, normal reference values are presented for biventricular size and function to be applied to male competitive athletes according to the disciplines practiced. A significant impact of training volume was demonstrated for the right ventricle: athletes practicing the largest number of training hours per week were those exhibiting the greatest degree of right ventricular remodeling. Notably, biventricular function was not significantly affected by training volume. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis defines the normal limits of biventricular size and function estimated by CMR in competitive athletes. The authors suggest using these normal reference values as an alternative to standard upper limits derived from the general population when interpreting CMR images in athletes.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this meta-analysis was to derive normal reference values of biventricular size and function estimated by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in competitive athletes. BACKGROUND: Exercise-induced enlargement of cardiac chambers is commonly observed in competitive athletes. However, ventricular dilatation is also a common phenotypic expression of life-threatening cardiomyopathies. The use of CMR for the exclusion of pathology is growing. However, normal reference values have not been established for athletes. METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic review of English-language studies in the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases investigating biventricular size and function by CMR in athletes. Athletes were divided into endurance, combined, and mixed groups according to the sport practiced. The potential impact of training volume was also evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies and 983 competitive athletes were included for CMR quantification of biventricular size and function. In this review, normal reference values are presented for biventricular size and function to be applied to male competitive athletes according to the disciplines practiced. A significant impact of training volume was demonstrated for the right ventricle: athletes practicing the largest number of training hours per week were those exhibiting the greatest degree of right ventricular remodeling. Notably, biventricular function was not significantly affected by training volume. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis defines the normal limits of biventricular size and function estimated by CMR in competitive athletes. The authors suggest using these normal reference values as an alternative to standard upper limits derived from the general population when interpreting CMR images in athletes.
Authors: Nadine Kawel-Boehm; Scott J Hetzel; Bharath Ambale-Venkatesh; Gabriella Captur; Christopher J Francois; Michael Jerosch-Herold; Michael Salerno; Shawn D Teague; Emanuela Valsangiacomo-Buechel; Rob J van der Geest; David A Bluemke Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2020-12-14 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: J Kübler; C Burgstahler; J M Brendel; S Gassenmaier; F Hagen; K Klingel; S-C Olthof; K Blume; B Wolfarth; K A L Mueller; S Greulich; P Krumm Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: David Dorian; Diptendu Chatterjee; Kim A Connelly; Jack M Goodman; Andrew T Yan; Robert F Bentley; Laura Banks; Robert M Hamilton; Paul Dorian Journal: CJC Open Date: 2021-07-14
Authors: Robyn Bryde; Andres I Applewhite; Abd Moain Abu Dabrh; Bryan J Taylor; Michael G Heckman; Sara E Filmalter; George Pujalte; Carlos Rojas; Alexander J Heckman; Tara J Brigham; Larry J Prokop; Brian P Shapiro Journal: Physiol Rep Date: 2021-12
Authors: B Domenech-Ximenos; M Sanz-de la Garza; S Prat-González; A Sepúlveda-Martínez; F Crispi; K Duran-Fernandez; R J Perea; B Bijnens; M Sitges Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 5.364