Key result
Resistance training preserves stroke volume ~12 percentage points better than endurance training during pressure loading.
Why the study?
Training-specific functional remodeling of the LV in response to different loading conditions had been suggested, but not experimentally tested in the same group of individuals.
Does the type of training (endurance vs resistance) induce stimulus-specific functional remodeling of the left ventricle in men?
Cross-Sectional (n=42)
Does the type of training (endurance vs resistance) induce stimulus-specific functional remodeling of the left ventricle in men?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The study provides novel evidence that the left ventricle undergoes distinct, training-specific adaptive responses depending on whether it is subjected to hemodynamic pressure or volume loading.
Left ventricular (LV) structural remodeling following athletic training has been evidenced through training-specific changes in wall thickness and geometry. Whether the LV response to changes in hemodynamic load also adapts in a training-specific manner is unknown. Using echocardiography, we examined LV responses of endurance-trained (n=15), resistance-trained (n=14), and non-athletic males (n=13) to (i) 20%, 40%, and 60% one-repetition-maximum (1RM) leg-press exercise, and (ii) intravascular Gelofusine infusion (7ml·kg-1) with passive leg-raise. While resting heart rate was lower in endurance-trained vs. controls (P=0.001), blood pressure was similar between groups. Endurance-trained individuals had lower wall thickness, but greater LV mass relative to body surface area vs. controls, with no difference between resistance-trained and controls. Leg-press evoked a similar increase in blood pressure; however, resistance-trained preserved stroke volume (SV; -3±8%) vs. controls at 60% 1RM (-15±7%, P=0.001). While the maintenance of SV was related to the change in longitudinal strain across all groups (R=0.537; P=0.007), time-to-peak strain was maintained in resistance-trained but delayed in endurance-trained individuals (1% vs. 12% delay; P=0.021). Volume infusion caused a similar increase in end-diastolic volume (EDV) and SV across groups, but leg-raise further increased EDV only in endurance-trained individuals (5±5% to 8±5%; P=0.018). Correlation analysis revealed a relationship between SV and longitudinal strain following infusion and leg-raise (R=0.334, P=0.054), however, we observed no between-group differences in longitudinal myocardial mechanics. In conclusion, resistance-trained individuals better maintained SV during pressure loading, whereas endurance-trained individuals demonstrated greater EDV reserve during volume loading. These data provide novel evidence of training-specific LV functional remodeling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dawkins et al. (2020) reported a cross-sectional. Athletic training (endurance or resistance) vs. Non-athletic controls was evaluated on Change in stroke volume at 60% 1RM leg-press exercise (p=0.001). Resistance training better preserved stroke volume during pressure loading (-3% vs -15%; P=0.001), while endurance training demonstrated greater end-diastolic volume reserve during volume loading.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: