Effect of Maximal Exercise on Left Ventricular Diastolic Function and Arterial Compliance in Older Hypertensives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
0585 Impaired left ventricular diastolic function (LVDF) and arterial compliance (AC) are seen with aging and hypertension and can lead to impaired exercise (EX) responses. EX training improves age-related cardiac impairment and is a treatment for hypertension; however, impact of a maximal exercise session on LVDF and AC in older hypertensives and subsequent training effects are unclear. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of maximal EX session on LVDF and AC. METHODS: Eight older hypertensive subjects (1 M and 7 F, 68.5 ± 5.7 yrs) participated in the study. Measures of LVDF (early filling flow velocity (E), late filling flow velocity (A), E/A ratio, isovolumic relaxation time (IVRT) and deceleration time (DT)) and arterial compliance (C) in carotid and brachial arteries were assessed using a 2D echocardiography at rest before, immediately after and 24 hours after maximal treadmill EX. RESULTS: E and A flow velocities increased after the EX and returned to baseline values 24 hours after the EX (p<0.05). Similar responses in IVRT and DT were observed immediately after the EX; however, these indices remained faster 24 hours later (p<0.05). C in carotid and brachial arteries was unaltered throughout the study. CONCLUSION: In older hypertensives, impaired AC was compensated by the improved LVDF with a maximal EX session. Continued impairment of AC may lead to chronic changes in LVDF, leading to impaired compensation of LV function and EX responses. Whether chronic EX training and blood pressure lowering alter this relationship is subject to further research. Supported by A.M Anderson Award, Lawson Health Research Institute.Table
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) | 0.001 | 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".