Reactive hyperemia captures training-related vascular adaptations more effectively than conduit artery dilation in healthy endurance-trained individuals.
Does reactive hyperemia capture training-related vascular adaptations more effectively than flow-mediated dilation in healthy endurance-trained individuals?
Reactive hyperemia may be a superior physiological marker compared to flow-mediated dilation for assessing vascular adaptations to endurance training in healthy individuals.
Although flow-mediated dilation (FMD) is a well-established marker of conduit artery endothelial function, it is not optimally suited to detect endurance exercise training-mediated vascular adaptations in healthy individuals. Herein, we evaluate reactive hyperemia (RH), adding resistance-vessel and microvascular responses, as a physiological feature that more closely reflects the peripheral remodeling and physiological environment associated with cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF). SUMMARY: Reactive hyperemia captures training-related vascular adaptations more effectively than conduit artery dilation in healthy endurance-trained individuals.
Blackmond et al. (2026) conducted a review in Cardiorespiratory fitness in healthy individuals. Reactive hyperemia (RH) assessment vs. Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) was evaluated on Detection of training-related vascular adaptations. Reactive hyperemia captures training-related vascular adaptations more effectively than conduit artery dilation in healthy endurance-trained individuals.