4.4 Article

Effect of Prolonged Walking on Cardiac Troponin Levels

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 105, 期 2, 页码 267-272

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.08.679

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increased cardiac troponin I (cTnI), a marker for cardiac damage, has been reported after strenuous exercise in young subjects. However, little is known about changes in cTnI after moderate-intensity exercise in a heterogenous population or which factors may contribute to this change in cTnI levels. We examined cTnI levels before and immediately after each day of a 4-day long-distance walking event (30 to 50 km/day) in a heterogenous group (67 men, 42 women), across a broad age range (21 to 82 years), with known cardiovascular pathology or risk factors present in many subjects (n = 24). Walking was performed at a self-selected pace. Cardiac TnI was assessed using a standard system (Immulite) with high values (>= 0.20 mu g/L) cross-checked using a high-sensitive cTnI assay (Centaur). Mean cTnI levels increased significantly from 0.04 to 0.07 mu g/L on day 1, with no further increase thereafter (p <0.001, analysis of variance). Backward linear regression found a weak, but significant, association of age (p <0.001), walking speed (p = 0.02), and cardiovascular pathology (p = 0.03) with postexercise cTnI level (combined r(2) = 0.11, p <0.001). In 6 participants (6%), cTnI was increased above the clinical cut-off value for myocardial infarction on >= 1 day. These participants supported the regression analysis, because they were older, walked at higher relative exercise intensity, and reported a high prevalence of cardiovascular pathology. In conclusion, prolonged, moderate-intensity exercise may result in an increase in cTnI levels in a broad spectrum of subjects, especially in older subjects with pre-existing cardiovascular disease or risk factors. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2010;105:267-272)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据