Key result
High-intensity special military training was independently associated with greater physiological left ventricular adaptation, including higher global longitudinal strain (coefficient β = 1.726), compared to lower intensity training.
Why the study?
The study sought to observe the influence of physical training intensity on left ventricular adaptation in elite air force soldiers compared with regular basic military training.
Does high-intensity physical training improve left ventricular adaptation in elite air force soldiers compared to light-moderate training?
Cross-Sectional (n=109)
No
Does high-intensity physical training improve left ventricular adaptation in elite air force soldiers compared to light-moderate training?
High-intensity physical training in elite soldiers is associated with greater physiological left ventricular adaptation, including higher global longitudinal strain and myocardial work efficiency, without evidence of maladaptation.
Cautious interpretation needed in military cohorts; hypothesis-generating for intensity-dependent LV remodeling requiring prospective validation.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to observe the influence of level physical training intensity on left ventricular (LV) adaptation in elite air force soldiers compared to regular basic military training. Methods: The LV adaptation of special military physical training for elite air force soldiers was compared with basic military training for regular troops. A group of the nonmilitary subject was also evaluated as a control group. The presence of LV adaptation was evaluated using some echocardiography parameters, including LV mass index (LVMI), LV ejection fraction (LVEF), global longitudinal strain (GLS), and myocardial work index. The parameters of the myocardial work index include global constructive work (GCW), global wasted work (GWW), global work index (GWI), and global work efficiency (GWE). Results: Forty-three elite air force soldiers underwent special military training, 43 regular troops underwent basic military training, and 23 nonmilitary subjects as a control group. Age, heart rate, blood pressure, and Cooper test results significantly differed among the three groups. Multivariate analysis among all groups showed that the level of physical training was associated with the LVMI (coefficient β = 6.061; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.91–10.22; P = 0.005), LVEF (coefficient β = −1.409; 95% CI = −2.41–[−0.41]; P = 0.006), LVGLS (coefficient β = 1.726; 95% CI = 1.20–2.25; P < 0.001), GWW (coefficient β = −13.875; 95% CI = −20.88–[−6.87]; P < 0.001), GWE (coefficient β = 0.954; 95% CI = 0.62–1.26; P < 0.001), GCW (coefficient β = 176.128; 95% CI = 121.16–231.10; P < 0.001), and GWI (coefficient β = 196.494; 95% CI = 144.61–248.38; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Higher intensity of physical training observed in a special military training is associated with higher LV GLS, GWE, GCW, GWI, and lower GWW value suggesting greater physiological adaptation than the lower intensity training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Junianto et al. (2023) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy males (n=109). High-intensity special military training vs. Basic military training (light-moderate intensity) and nonmilitary controls was evaluated on Left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) (coefficient β = 1.726, 95% CI 1.20-2.25, p=<0.001). High-intensity special military training was independently associated with greater physiological left ventricular adaptation, including higher global longitudinal strain (coefficient β = 1.726), compared to lower intensity training.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: