MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cardiac atrophy in women following bed rest

2007· article· en· W2105479159 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Todd A. Dorfman, Benjamin D. Levine, Tommy Tillery, Ronald M. Peshock, Jeff Hastings, Suzanne M. Schneider, Brandon R. Macias, Gianni Biolo, Alan R. Hargens

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNational Cancer InstituteEuropean Space AgencyNational Space Biomedical Research InstituteNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsBed restPresyncopeMedicineInternal medicineOrthostatic intoleranceCardiologySupine positionOrthostatic vital signsAtrophyDeconditioningStroke volumeCardiac outputEndocrinologyHeart rateHemodynamicsBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both chronic microgravity exposure and long-duration bed rest induce cardiac atrophy, which leads to reduced standing stroke volume and orthostatic intolerance. However, despite the fact that women appear to be more susceptible to postspaceflight presyncope and orthostatic hypotension than male astronauts, most previous high-resolution studies of cardiac morphology following microgravity have been performed only in men. Because female athletes have less physiological hypertrophy than male athletes, we reasoned that they also might have altered physiological cardiac atrophy after bed rest. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in 24 healthy young women (32.1 +/- 4 yr) to measure left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) mass, volumes, and morphology accurately before and after 60 days of 6 degrees head-down tilt (HDT) bed rest. Subjects were matched and then randomly assigned to sedentary bed rest (controls, n = 8) or two treatment groups consisting of 1) exercise training using supine treadmill running within lower body negative pressure plus resistive training (n = 8), or 2) protein (0.45 g x kg(-1) x day(-1) increase) plus branched-chain amino acid (BCAA) (7.2 g/day) supplementation (n = 8). After sedentary bed rest without nutritional supplementation, there were significant reductions in LV (96 +/- 26 to 77 +/- 25 ml; P = 0.03) and RV volumes (104 +/- 33 to 86 +/- 25 ml; P = 0.02), LV (2.2 +/- 0.2 to 2.0 +/- 0.2 g/kg; P = 0.003) and RV masses (0.8 +/- 0.1 to 0.6 +/- 0.1 g/kg; P < 0.001), and the length of the major axis of the LV (90 +/- 6 to 84 +/- 7 mm. P < 0.001), similar to what has been observed previously in men (8.0%; Perhonen MA, Franco F, Lane LD, Buckey JC, Blomqvist Zerwekh JE, Peshock RM, Weatherall PT, Levine BD. J Appl Physiol 91: 645-653, 2001). In contrast, there were no significant reductions in LV or RV volumes in the exercise-trained group, and the length of the major axis was preserved. Moreover, there were significant increases in LV (1.9 +/- 0.4 to 2.3 +/- 0.3 g/kg; P < 0.001) and RV masses (0.7 +/- 0.1 to 0.8 +/- 0.2 g/kg; P = 0.002), as well as mean wall thickness (9 +/- 2 to 11 +/- 1 mm; P = 0.02). The interaction between sedentary and exercise LV and RV masses was highly significant (P < 0.0001). Protein and BCAA supplementation led to an intermediate phenotype with no change in LV or RV mass after bed rest, but there remained a significant reduction in LV volume (103 +/- 14 to 80 +/- 16 ml; P = 0.02) and major-axis length (91 +/- 5 to 88 +/- 7 mm; P = 0.003). All subjects lost an equivalent amount of body mass (3.4 +/- 0.2 kg control; 3.1 +/- 0.04 kg exercise; 2.8 +/- 0.1 kg protein). Cardiac atrophy occurs in women similar to men following sedentary 60 days HDT bed rest. However, exercise training and, to a lesser extent, protein supplementation may be potential countermeasures to the cardiac atrophy associated with chronic unloading conditions such as in spaceflight and prolonged bed rest.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations184
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicSpaceflight effects on biologyFrench-language works237,207