The Impact of Intradialytic Pedaling Exercise on Arterial Stiffness: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial in a Hemodialysis Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Regular exercise is known to reduce arterial stiffness (AS) in hemodialysis patients. However, the impact of a more realistic intradialytic form of exercise, such as pedaling, is unclear. We aimed to examine (i) the effect of intradialytic pedaling exercise on AS over 4 months and (ii) the longer term effect of pedaling on AS 4 months after exercise cessation. METHODS: Patients on stable in-center hemodialysis (3 x/week) were randomly assigned 1:1 to either intradialytic pedaling exercise (EX) or to a control group receiving usual hemodialysis (nonEX) for 4 months. At baseline and 4 months, peripheral and central blood pressure (BP) indices, heart rate (HR), augmentation index HR corrected (AIx75), and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) were assessed (applanation tonometry). Measurements were repeated in the EX group 4 months postexercise cessation. RESULTS: As per protocol analysis was completed in 10 EX group participants (58 ± 17 years, body mass index 26 ± 4 kg/m2) and 10 nonEX group participants (53 ± 15 years, body mass index 27 ± 6 kg/m2). Peripheral and central BP was unchanged in both groups. AIx75 was unchanged in the EX group, however, a significant median increase of 3.5% [interquartile range, IQR 1.0, 8.5] was noted in the nonEX group (P = 0.009). We noted a significantly greater absolute decrease in cfPWV in the EX group compared to controls: -1.00 [IQR -1.95, 0.05] vs. 0.20 [IQR -0.10, 0.90] (P = 0.033). Interestingly, the decrease in cfPWV observed in the EX group was partially reversed 4 months after exercise cessation. CONCLUSION: Intradialytic pedaling exercise has a beneficial impact on AS. This relationship warrants further investigation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Trial Number #NCT03027778 (clinicaltrials.gov).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".