| Literature DB >> 36236307 |
Felix Sebastian Oberhoffer1, Pengzhu Li1, André Jakob1, Robert Dalla-Pozza1, Nikolaus Alexander Haas1, Guido Mandilaras1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Minors are considered the main consumer group of energy drinks (EDs). The aim of this study was to investigate the acute effects of ED consumption on left ventricular (LV) hemodynamics and efficiency in healthy children and teenagers.Entities:
Keywords: echocardiography; energy drinks; left ventricular dysfunction; left ventricular function; pediatrics; randomized trial
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36236307 PMCID: PMC9572576 DOI: 10.3390/s22197209
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Semiautomatic Assessment of Left Ventricular Volumes Recorded in Apical Four-Chamber View. End-diastole (A) (R wave in ECG) and end-systole (B) (end of T wave in ECG) were set automatically by the software. The LV endocardium was marked precisely by the investigator in end-diastole (A) and end-systole (B). The following parameters were then acquired semiautomatically by the software (C): EDV, end-diastolic volume; ESV, end-systolic volume; SV, stroke volume; EF, ejection fraction.
Figure 2Assessment of the Pre-Ejection and the Total-Systolic Period of the Left Ventricular Outflow Tract. A pulsed wave Doppler was positioned over the aortic valve in apical five-chamber view.
Figure 3Non-Invasive Left Ventricular Pressure–Volume Loop. ESV, end-systolic volume; EDV, end-diastolic volume; Pes, end-systolic blood pressure. A (ESV/0 mmHg), B (EDV/0 mmHg), C (EDV/Pes), D (ESV/Pes). A–B, diastolic filling; B–C, isovolumic contraction; C–D, ejection; D–A, isovolumic relaxation. ESPVR, end-systolic pressure–volume relationship; Ees(sb), end-systolic elastance derived by single-beat technique; V0, intersection between ESPVR and x axis; Ea, arterial elastance; Epot, potential energy; SW, stroke work; PVA, pressure–volume area.
Study Participants’ Characteristics (n = 24).
| Characteristics | Total |
|---|---|
| Age, years (mean ± standard deviation) | 14.90 ± 2.27 |
| Sex, | |
| Male | 13 (54.17) |
| Female | 11 (45.83) |
| Weight Classification, | |
| Normal weight | 21 (87.50) |
| Overweight | 3 (12.50) |
| Obese | 0 (0) |
| Caffeine Consumption Behavior, | |
| Rarely | 15 (62.5) |
| Occasionally | 3 (12.5) |
| Frequently | 4 (16.67) |
| Daily | 2 (8.33) |
| Energy Drink Consumption Behavior, | |
| Never | 10 (41.67) |
| Rarely | 11 (45.83) |
| Occasionally | 1 (4.17) |
| Frequently | 2 (8.33) |
| Daily | 0 (0) |
a Participant was a rare caffeine consumer if they consumed <1 caffeine-containing drink per month, an occasional caffeine consumer if they consumed 1 to 3 caffeine-containing drinks per month, a frequent caffeine consumer if they consumed 1 to 6 caffeine-containing drinks per week and a daily caffeine consumer if they consumed ≥1 caffeine-containing drink per day [17]. b Participant was a rare energy drink (ED) consumer if they consumed <1 ED per month, an occasional ED consumer if they consumed 1 to 3 EDs per month, a frequent ED consumer if they consumed 1 to 6 EDs per week and a daily ED consumer if they consumed ≥1 ED per day.
Left Ventricular Hemodynamics and Efficiency Parameters at Baseline (n = 24).
| Parameters | Energy Drink | Placebo | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EDV (mL) | 88.66 ± 20.47 | 86.83 ± 18.81 | 0.42 |
| ESV (mL) | 46.56 ± 11.82 | 45.70 ± 11.27 | 0.67 |
| SV (mL) | 42.10 ± 11.41 | 41.13 ± 10.81 | 0.61 |
| EF (%) | 47.51 ± 6.47 | 47.21 ± 6.29 | 0.87 |
| Ea (mmHg/mL) | 2.43 (2.09–3.25) | 2.58 (2.12–2.98) | 0.56 |
| Ees(sb) (mmHg/mL) | 3.50 ± 0.93 | 3.63 ± 1.14 | 0.49 |
| Epot (mmHg × mL) | 1545 (1319–1820) | 1442 (1167–1976) | 0.66 |
| SW (mmHg × mL) | 4301 ± 1266 | 4222 ± 1188 | 0.80 |
| PVA (mmHg × mL) | 5892 ± 1680 | 5855 ± 1751 | 0.32 |
| Ea/Ees(sb) | 0.75 (0.67–0.82) | 0.69 (0.64–0.82) | 0.56 |
| CW (mmHg × mL × HR) | 290434 ± 82889 | 288475 ± 75661 | 0.75 |
| WE (%) | 72.77 (70.84–75.04) | 74.27 (70.95–75.82) | 0.71 |
| CE (mmHg) | 139.83 ± 12.59 | 141.91 ± 15.99 | 0.49 |
Mean ± standard deviation is used for normally distributed variables. Median (interquartile range) is used for non-normally distributed variables. EDV, end-diastolic volume; ESV, end-systolic volume; SV, stroke volume; EF, ejection fraction; Ea, arterial elastance; Ees(sb), end-systolic elastance derived by single-beat technique; Epot, potential energy; SW, stroke work; PVA, pressure–volume area; Ea/Ees(sb), ventricular–arterial coupling; CW, cardiac work; HR, heart rate; WE, work efficiency; CE, cardiac efficiency. For SW, PVA and CW, data were normally distributed while the differences between ED and placebo group were not normally distributed. Therefore, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied. For Ea, Epot, Ea/Ees(sb) and WE, data were not normally distributed, while the differences between ED and placebo group were normally distributed. Therefore, the paired t-test was applied.
Acute Effects of Energy Drinks on Left Ventricular Hemodynamics (n = 24).
| Parameters | Energy Drink | Placebo | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EDV (mL) | 87.93 ± 19.12 | 88.95 ± 19.78 | 0.44 |
| ESV (mL) | 44.94 ± 11.54 | 45.51 ± 11.89 | 0.52 |
| SV (mL) | 42.99 ± 10.51 | 43.43 ± 10.74 | 0.68 |
| EF (%) | 48.98 ± 6.36 | 48.84 ± 6.31 | 0.86 |
| Ea (mmHg/mL) | 2.56 ± 0.62 | 2.47 ± 0.67 | 0.19 |
| Ees(sb) (mmHg/mL) | 3.66 ± 1.00 | 3.47 ± 0.98 | 0.05 |
| Epot (mmHg × mL) | 1624 ± 633 | 1630 ± 671 | 0.88 |
| SW (mmHg × mL) | 4501 ± 1266 | 4413 ± 1262 | 0.40 |
| PVA (mmHg × mL) | 6124 ± 1796 | 6043 ± 1821 | 0.53 |
Data are given as mean ± standard deviation. As the statistical conclusions remained consistent before and after data transformation, Table 3 only presents the original data. EDV, end-diastolic volume; ESV, end-systolic volume; SV, stroke volume; EF, ejection fraction; Ea, arterial elastance; Ees(sb), end-systolic elastance derived by single-beat technique; Epot, potential energy; SW, stroke work; PVA, pressure–volume area.
Acute Effects of Energy Drinks on Left Ventricular Efficiency (n = 24).
| Parameters | Energy Drink | Placebo | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ea/Ees(sb) | |||
| Time 0 | 0.75 (0.67–0.82) | 0.69 (0.64–0.82) | 0.56 |
| Time 30 | 0.66 (0.64–0.70) | 0.66 (0.61–0.75) | 1.00 |
| Time 60 | 0.66 (0.62–0.76) | 0.69 (0.61–0.79) | 0.87 |
| Time 120 | 0.65 (0.61–0.74) | 0.67 (0.63–0.80) | 0.13 |
| Time 240 | 0.67 (0.62–0.79) | 0.71 (0.62–0.75) | 0.56 |
| CW (mmHg × mL × HR) | 307,145 ± 98,350 | 304,361 ± 97,313 | 0.69 |
| WE (%) | |||
| Time 0 | 72.77 (70.84–75.04) | 74.27 (70.95–75.82) | 0.71 |
| Time 30 | 75.12 (74.07–75.84) | 75.19 (72.70–76.52) | 0.66 |
| Time 60 | 75.08 (72.58–76.33) | 74.28 (71.59–76.50) | 0.79 |
| Time 120 | 75.49 (73.07–76.54) | 74.97 (71.38–76.14) | 0.15 |
| Time 240 | 75.05 (71.68–76.22) | 73.85 (72.80–76.49) | 0.63 |
| CE (mmHg) | |||
| Time 0 | 139.83 ± 12.59 | 141.91 ± 15.99 | 0.49 |
| Time 30 | 141.86 ± 11.98 | 137.72 ± 12.38 | 0.13 |
| Time 60 | 135.89 (133.12–154.15) | 136.15 (129.31–146.06) | 0.14 |
| Time 120 | 137.23 (129.91–146.89) | 133.56 (122.90–145.29) | 0.21 |
| Time 240 | 140.72 (133.21–149.73) | 135.60 (124.78–140.33) | <0.01 ** |
Mean ± standard deviation is used for normally distributed variables. Median (interquartile range) is used for non-normally distributed variables. Ea/Ees(sb), ventricular–arterial coupling; CW, cardiac work; HR, heart rate; WE, work efficiency; CE, cardiac efficiency. ** p < 0.01. For Ea/Ees(sb), data at times 0, 60 and 240 were not normally distributed, while the differences between ED and placebo group were normally distributed. Therefore, the paired t-test was applied. For Ea/Ees(sb), data as well as the differences between ED and placebo groups at times 30 and 120 were not normally distributed. Therefore, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied. As the statistical conclusions remained consistent before and after data transformation, CW is only presented as orginal data. For WE, the differences between ED and placebo group were normally distributed at times 0, 30, 60 and 240. Therefore, the paired t-test was applied. For CE, the differences between ED and placebo groups were normally distributed at all time points. Therefore, the paired t-test was applied.
Figure 4Acute Effects of Energy Drinks on Cardiac Efficiency. ** p < 0.01.