Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Research examining the Athlete’s Heart has often focused on endurance athletes, yet no clear consensus has emerged on the cardiac adaptations observed in resistance-trained athletes. The purpose of this study is to examine cardiac structure and systolic function in resistance-trained athletes compared to untrained individuals.</p> Methods <p>An observational cross-sectional study conducted echocardiographic examinations on male resistance-trained athletes (<i>n</i> = 12; body mass: 93 ± 19&#xa0;kg [95%CI 82–104]) and age-matched untrained volunteers (<i>n</i> = 12; body mass: 80 ± 7&#xa0;kg [95%CI 76–84]). Resting blood pressure and anthropometrics were gathered to allow indexing of cardiac parameters to body size and composition.</p> Results <p>Compared to untrained individuals, resistance-trained athletes had greater septal (resistance-trained: 1.2 ± 0.1&#xa0;cm; untrained: 0.9 ± 0.1&#xa0;cm; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), and posterior (resistance-trained: 1.2 ± 0.1&#xa0;cm; untrained: 0.8 ± 0.1&#xa0;cm; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) wall thickness, and absolute left ventricular mass (resistance-trained: 275 ± 50&#xa0;g; untrained: 162 ± 25&#xa0;g; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). These differences in left ventricular mass remained significant after accounting for body size and composition (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Cardiac dimensions of the resistance-trained athletes are greater than the normative range described in current literature. Significant differences in functional parameters including stroke volume, E/A ratio and LV end-systolic wall stress were also observed (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p> Conclusion <p>Both structural and functional differences in cardiac measures are apparent when comparing those engaged in chronic resistance-trained to untrained individuals. Furthermore, despite these structural differences, no significant impairment in left ventricular function was observed. However, whilst the cardiac dimensions of most resistance-trained athletes do not exceed the upper limits for physiological hypertrophy the exact mechanism for these differences is unclear and warrants further investigation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Cardiac structure and systolic function in resistance-trained athletes versus untrained male adults

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月22日

查看全文
  • Abigail M. Saunders,
  • Rebecca L. Jones,
  • Joanna C. Richards

摘要

Purpose

Research examining the Athlete’s Heart has often focused on endurance athletes, yet no clear consensus has emerged on the cardiac adaptations observed in resistance-trained athletes. The purpose of this study is to examine cardiac structure and systolic function in resistance-trained athletes compared to untrained individuals.

Methods

An observational cross-sectional study conducted echocardiographic examinations on male resistance-trained athletes (n = 12; body mass: 93 ± 19 kg [95%CI 82–104]) and age-matched untrained volunteers (n = 12; body mass: 80 ± 7 kg [95%CI 76–84]). Resting blood pressure and anthropometrics were gathered to allow indexing of cardiac parameters to body size and composition.

Results

Compared to untrained individuals, resistance-trained athletes had greater septal (resistance-trained: 1.2 ± 0.1 cm; untrained: 0.9 ± 0.1 cm; p < 0.001), and posterior (resistance-trained: 1.2 ± 0.1 cm; untrained: 0.8 ± 0.1 cm; p < 0.001) wall thickness, and absolute left ventricular mass (resistance-trained: 275 ± 50 g; untrained: 162 ± 25 g; p < 0.01). These differences in left ventricular mass remained significant after accounting for body size and composition (p < 0.01). Cardiac dimensions of the resistance-trained athletes are greater than the normative range described in current literature. Significant differences in functional parameters including stroke volume, E/A ratio and LV end-systolic wall stress were also observed (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Both structural and functional differences in cardiac measures are apparent when comparing those engaged in chronic resistance-trained to untrained individuals. Furthermore, despite these structural differences, no significant impairment in left ventricular function was observed. However, whilst the cardiac dimensions of most resistance-trained athletes do not exceed the upper limits for physiological hypertrophy the exact mechanism for these differences is unclear and warrants further investigation.