Why the study?
ECG findings have previously been investigated in male Rugby Football League athletes, but variations in other demographics remain less understood.
Do sex, age, and weekly training exposure influence 12-lead ECG parameters and training-related cardiac electrical adaptations in Rugby Football League athletes?
Do sex, age, and weekly training exposure influence 12-lead ECG parameters and training-related cardiac electrical adaptations in Rugby Football League athletes?
In Rugby Football League athletes, most apparent sex-based differences in ECG parameters are driven by differences in weekly training volume rather than biological sex, except for persistently longer PR intervals and QRS durations in males, highlighting the need to account for sex, age, and training exposure during pre-participation cardiac screening.
Sex differences in PR interval warrant ECG interpretation caution in RFL athletes; leaves open need for validated age- and sex-specific norms.
Electrocardiogram (ECG) findings in male Rugby Football League (RFL) athletes have previously been investigated but variations in other demographics are less understood. The study examined 161 ECGs in male and female, paediatric (< 18 years old) and adult (≥ 18 years old) RFL athletes. Athletes (65% male, 35% female) aged 14-33 years underwent a 12-lead ECG that was assessed for training-related cardiac electrical adaptations. Four athletes with abnormal ECGs were excluded. Results indicated that male athletes had an increased PR interval (152 ± 32 vs. 140 ± 19 ms; p < 0.001), QRS duration (98 ± 7 vs. 87 ± 6 ms; p < 0.001), voltage criteria for right (6 ± 3 vs. 4 ± 2 mm; p < 0.001) and left (33 ± 9 vs. 27 ± 7 mm; p < 0.001) ventricular hypertrophy (RVH/LVH) compared to females, who exhibited increased resting heart rate (HR) (67 ± 11 vs. 62 ± 11 bpm; p < 0.001) and QTc intervals (408 ± 45 vs. 398 ± 22 ms; p = 0.028). Adult athletes had a reduced HR (61 ± 10 vs. 66 ± 13 bpm; p < 0.001) and RVH criteria (5 ± 2 vs. 7 ± 3 mm; p = 0.015) compared to paediatric athletes. When controlling for weekly training hours in adult athletes, males present only a longer PR interval (156 ± 32 vs. 141 ± 19 ms; p < 0.037) and QRS duration (99 ± 7 vs. 87 ± 7 ms; p < 0.001) when compared to females. These results highlight the need for tailored cardiac screening guidelines that account for an RFL athlete's sex, age and training exposure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Warrington et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: