Sex Differences in Cardiac Function After Prolonged Strenuous Exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sex differences in left ventricular (LV) function after an ultramarathon, and the association of vascular and training indices with the magnitude of exercise-induced cardiac fatigue. DESIGN: Descriptive field study. SETTING: Fat Dog 100 Ultramarathon Trail Race, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-four (13 women) recreational runners (aged 28-56 years). INTERVENTIONS: A 100-km or 160-km mountain marathon. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline baroreceptor sensitivity, heart rate variability, and arterial compliance; Pre-exercise and postexercise echocardiographic evaluations of LV dimensions, volumes, Doppler flow velocities, tissue velocities, strain, and strain rate. RESULTS: Finishers represented 17 men (44.8 ± 6.6 years) and 8 women (45.9 ± 10.2 years; P = 0.758). After ultraendurance exercise, significant reductions (P < 0.05) in fractional shortening (men: 40.9 ± 6.9 to 34.1 ± 7.6%; women: 42.5 ± 6.5 to 34.6 ± 7.9%) diastolic filling (E/A, men: 1.28 ± 0.68 to 1.26 ± 0.33; women: 1.55 ± 0.51 to 1.30 ± 0.27), septal and lateral tissue velocities (E'), and longitudinal strain (men: -21.02 ± 1.98 to -18.44 ± 0.34; women: -20.28 ± 1.90 to -18.44 ± 2.34) were observed. Sex differences were found for baseline cardiac structure and global function, peak late transmitral flow velocity, and estimates of LV filling pressures (P < 0.05). Regression analysis found that higher baseline arterial compliance was associated with lower reductions in cardiac function postexercise, to which sex was a significant factor for E' of the lateral wall. Faster race pace and greater lifetime ultramarathons were associated with lower reductions in LV longitudinal strain (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac responses after an ultramarathon were similar between men and women. Greater evidence of exercise-induced cardiac fatigue was found to be associated with lower baseline arterial compliance and training status/experience. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that vascular health is an important contributor to the degree of cardiovascular strain incurred as the result of an acute bout of prolonged strenuous exercise.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".