4.7 Article

Aerobic exercise training does not modify large-artery compliance in isolated systolic hypertension

Journal

HYPERTENSION
Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages 222-226

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.HYP.38.2.222

Keywords

hypertension, isolated systolic; arteries; compliance; exercise; aorta

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study characterized large-artery properties in patients with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) and determined the efficacy of exercise training in modifying these properties. Twenty patients (10 male and 10 female) with stage I ISH and 20 age- and gender-matched control subjects were recruited, and large-artery properties were assessed noninvasively. Ten ISH patients (5 male and 5 female) were enrolled in a randomized crossover study comparing 8 weeks of moderate intensity cycling with 8 weeks of sedentary activity. Brachial and carotid systolic, diastolic, mean, and pulse pressures were higher in the ISH group than in the control group. Systemic arterial compliance (0.43 +/-0.04 versus 0.29 +/-0.02 arbitrary compliance units for the control versus ISH groups, respectively; P=0.01) was lower, and carotid-to-femoral pulse-wave velocity (9.67 +/-0.36 versus 11.43 +/-0.51 m . s(-1) for the control versus ISH groups, respectively; P=0.007), input impedance (2.39 +/-0.19 versus 3.27 +/-0.34 mm Hg . s . cm(-1) for the control versus ISH groups, respectively; P=0.04), and characteristic impedance (1.67 +/-0.17 versus 2.34 +/-0.27 mm Hg . s . cm(-1) for the control versus ISH groups, respectively; P=0.05) were higher in the ISH group than in the control group. Training increased maximal oxygen consumption by 13 +/-5% (P=0.04) and maximum workload by 8 +/-4% (P=0.05); however, there was no effect on arterial mechanical properties, blood lipids, or left ventricular mass or function. These results suggest that the large-artery stiffening associated with ISH is resistant to modification through short-term aerobic training.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available