Scholarlink

VO2peak, adjusted for body weight, is the predominant metric for evaluating cardiopulmonary fitness (CPF). However, this measure can be misleading as adipose tissue does not contribute to cardiopulmonary function. Our research evaluated how adjusting VO2peak for fat-free mass (FFM) or skeletal muscle mass (SMM) aligns with other potential CPF indicators, such as ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) and various post-exercise metrics. We recruited 120 healthy medical students, 19 years of age, from the University of Medicine and Pharmacy in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, between September 2022 and February 2023. Participants underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing on a bicycle ergometer and had their body composition measured through bioelectrical impedance analysis. Weight-adjusted VO2peak correlated positively with weight-adjusted VT1 (r = 0.730, p < 0.001), %VT1predmax (r = 0.306, p = 0.001), and RER overshoot (r = 0.304, p = 0.001), and negatively with %VT1max (r = −0.191, p = 0.037), VO2 half-life recovery (r = −0.389, p < 0.001), VO2 time for recovery (r = −0.392, p < 0.001), and time to RERpeak (r = −0.201, p = 0.030). Both FFM and SMM adjustments of VO2peak showed significant correlations with weight-adjusted VT1 (r = 0.647, p < 0.001; r = 0.615, p < 0.001, respectively), %VT1predmax (r = 0.607, p < 0.001; r = 0.645, p < 0.001, respectively), and RER overshoot (r = 0.319, p < 0.001; r = 0.279, p = 0.002). Classifying CPF into sextiles (<20th, 20–39th, 40–59th, 60–79th, 80–94th, ≥95th percentile) demonstrated the highest concordance between SMM-adjusted VO2peak and %VT1predmax (kappa = 0.212, agreement = 35.8%). The study confirms that weight-adjusted VO2peak is a comprehensive indicator of CPF, with strong correlations to various fitness metrics. Adjusting VO2peak for SMM or FFM also effectively represents CPF. Furthermore, VT1 emerges as a promising metric for CPF classification.

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

Cardiopulmonary Fitness Classification: Integrating Skeletal Muscle and Fat-Free Mass into VO2peak Evaluation

  • 会议论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Tai Tran-Quoc,
  • Anh-Thu Huynh Dang,
  • Quan Vu Tran Thien,
  • Duy To Truong,
  • Khue Bui Diem,
  • Duy Le Pham,
  • Thu Nguyen Ngoc Phuong,
  • Vinh Nguyen Nhu

摘要

VO2peak, adjusted for body weight, is the predominant metric for evaluating cardiopulmonary fitness (CPF). However, this measure can be misleading as adipose tissue does not contribute to cardiopulmonary function. Our research evaluated how adjusting VO2peak for fat-free mass (FFM) or skeletal muscle mass (SMM) aligns with other potential CPF indicators, such as ventilatory threshold 1 (VT1) and various post-exercise metrics. We recruited 120 healthy medical students, 19 years of age, from the University of Medicine and Pharmacy in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, between September 2022 and February 2023. Participants underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing on a bicycle ergometer and had their body composition measured through bioelectrical impedance analysis. Weight-adjusted VO2peak correlated positively with weight-adjusted VT1 (r = 0.730, p < 0.001), %VT1predmax (r = 0.306, p = 0.001), and RER overshoot (r = 0.304, p = 0.001), and negatively with %VT1max (r = −0.191, p = 0.037), VO2 half-life recovery (r = −0.389, p < 0.001), VO2 time for recovery (r = −0.392, p < 0.001), and time to RERpeak (r = −0.201, p = 0.030). Both FFM and SMM adjustments of VO2peak showed significant correlations with weight-adjusted VT1 (r = 0.647, p < 0.001; r = 0.615, p < 0.001, respectively), %VT1predmax (r = 0.607, p < 0.001; r = 0.645, p < 0.001, respectively), and RER overshoot (r = 0.319, p < 0.001; r = 0.279, p = 0.002). Classifying CPF into sextiles (<20th, 20–39th, 40–59th, 60–79th, 80–94th, ≥95th percentile) demonstrated the highest concordance between SMM-adjusted VO2peak and %VT1predmax (kappa = 0.212, agreement = 35.8%). The study confirms that weight-adjusted VO2peak is a comprehensive indicator of CPF, with strong correlations to various fitness metrics. Adjusting VO2peak for SMM or FFM also effectively represents CPF. Furthermore, VT1 emerges as a promising metric for CPF classification.