MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cholinergic‐mediated Circulatory Responses at the Onset of Isometric Exercise: Does Sex Matter?

2022· article· en· W4225422187 on OpenAlexaff
Milena Samora, André L. Teixeira, Jeann L. Sabino‐Carvalho, Lauro C. Vianna

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsIsometric exerciseCirculatory systemCholinergicMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction We have shown that handgrip exercise evokes an initial decrease in systemic vascular resistance (SVR), which was abolished by cholinergic blockade (glycopyrrolate) and, thereby, augmented the blood pressure (BP) response. These findings suggest that a cholinergic mechanism is important for the BP and SVR responses at the onset of isometric handgrip exercise in humans. Noteworthy, this previous study included men only, and was not designed to investigate the potential existence of sex‐related differences in immediate BP and circulatory responses evoked at the exercise onset. Given this, the aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that women present an attenuated fall in SVR and increased pressor response compared to men at the onset of isometric handgrip exercise due to a blunted cholinergic vasodilation. Methods Ten healthy men (aged 21 ± 1 year) and 10 women (aged 24 ± 1 year) were recruited. Women were non‐oral contraceptives users and performed experiments in the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle. Participants performed 20s bout of isometric handgrip exercise at 40% of maximal voluntary contraction. Beat‐to‐beat heart rate (HR) (ECG) and mean BP (finger photopletysmography) were continuously measured. Beat‐to‐beat stroke volume (SV) was obtained with the Modelflow method and matched with HR to estimate cardiac output (CO) and SVR. The exercise responses were expressed as a change from 10s immediately before the onset of voluntary contraction. Results The BP response pattern appeared to be different between men and women at the onset of isometric exercise. While men presented a typical exercise‐evoked biphasic BP response (3s: Δ2 ± 2 mmHg; 10s: Δ1 ± 1 mmHg; 20s: Δ5 ± 3 mmHg), women showed a progressive increase in mean BP (3s: Δ1 ± 1 mmHg; 10s; Δ3 ± 1 mmHg; 20s: Δ6 ± 1 mmHg; P=0.681). Men demonstrated a decrease in SVR at 3s (Δ‐0.9 ± 0.3 mmHg.L ‐1 .min), 10s (Δ ‐1.6 ± 0.4 mmHg.L ‐1 .min) and 20s (Δ‐1.9 ± 0.7 mmHg.L ‐1 .min) following the exercise onset, and these responses tended to be attenuated in women (3s: Δ‐0.3 ± 0.3 mmHg.L ‐1 .min; 10s: Δ‐1.2 ± 0.4 mmHg.L ‐1 .min; 20s: Δ‐0.6 ± 0.5 mmHg.L ‐1 .min; P=0.131). There were no sex differences in HR, SV and CO responses to exercise. Conclusion These findings suggest a lack of sex differences in immediate BP and circulatory responses at the onset of isometric handgrip exercise, indicative of similar cholinergic‐mediated vasodilation in skeletal muscle between men and women.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicCardiovascular and exercise physiology→French-language works237,207→