Effects of exercise intensity on vascular and autonomic components of the baroreflex following glucose ingestion in adolescents

Confirming the attainment of maximal oxygen uptake within special and clinical groups: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiopulmonary exercise test and verification phase protocols

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A plateau in oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) during an incremental cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) to volitional exhaustion appears less likely to occur in special and clinical populations. Secondary maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) criteria have been shown to commonly underestimate the actual [Formula: see text]. The verification phase protocol might determine the occurrence of 'true' [Formula: see text] in these populations. The primary aim of the current study was to systematically review and provide a meta-analysis on the suitability of the verification phase for confirming 'true' [Formula: see text] in special and clinical groups. Secondary aims were to explore the applicability of the verification phase according to specific participant characteristics and investigate which test protocols and procedures minimise the differences between the highest [Formula: see text] values attained in the CPET and verification phase.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and EMBASE) were searched using specific search strategies and relevant data were extracted from primary studies. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were systematically reviewed. Meta-analysis techniques were applied to quantify weighted mean differences (standard deviations) in peak [Formula: see text] from a CPET and a verification phase within study groups using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses investigated the differences in [Formula: see text] according to individual characteristics and test protocols. The methodological quality of the included primary studies was assessed using a modified Downs and Black checklist to obtain a level of evidence. Participant-level [Formula: see text] data were analysed according to the threshold criteria reported by the studies or the inherent measurement error of the metabolic analysers and displayed as Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were included in the systematic review, whilst 30 presented quantitative information for meta-analysis. Within the 30 studies, the highest mean [Formula: see text] values attained in the CPET and verification phase protocols were similar (mean difference = -0.00 [95% confidence intervals, CI = -0.03 to 0.03] L·min-1, p = 0.87; level of evidence, LoE: strong). The specific clinical groups with sufficient primary studies to be meta-analysed showed a similar [Formula: see text] between the CPET and verification phase (p > 0.05, LoE: limited to strong). Across all 30 studies, [Formula: see text] was not affected by differences in test protocols (p > 0.05; LoE: moderate to strong). Only 23 (53.5%) of the 43 reviewed studies reported how many participants achieved a lower, equal, or higher [Formula: see text] value in the verification phase versus the CPET or reported or supplied participant-level [Formula: see text] data for this information to be obtained. The percentage of participants that achieved a lower, equal, or higher [Formula: see text] value in the verification phase was highly variable across studies (e.g. the percentage that achieved a higher [Formula: see text] in the verification phase ranged from 0% to 88.9%).

CONCLUSION

Group-level verification phase data appear useful for confirming a specific CPET protocol likely elicited [Formula: see text], or a reproducible [Formula: see text], for a given special or clinical group. Participant-level data might be useful for confirming whether specific participants have likely elicited [Formula: see text], or a reproducible [Formula: see text], however, more research reporting participant-level data is required before evidence-based guidelines can be given.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021247658) https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero.

Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training on the Vascular and Autonomic Components of the Baroreflex at Rest in Adolescents

PURPOSE

In a sample of healthy adolescents, the authors aimed to investigate the effects of high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE) training and detraining on baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) and it's vascular and autonomic components at rest.

METHODS

Nineteen volunteers were randomly allocated to (1) 4 weeks HIIE training performed 3 times per week or (2) a control condition with no intervention for the same duration as HIIE training. PRE, POST, and following 2 weeks of detraining resting supine heart rate and blood pressure were measured, and a cross-spectral method (integrated gain [gain in low frequency]) was used to determine BRS gain. Arterial compliance (AC) was assessed as the BRS vascular component. LFgain divided by AC (LFgain/AC) was used as the autonomic determinant of BRS.

RESULTS

The HIIE training was completed with 100% compliance. HIIE did not change resting gain in low frequency (LFgain) (P = .66; effect size = 0.21), AC (P = .44; effect size = 0.36), or LFgain/AC (P = .68; effect size = 0.19) compared to control.

CONCLUSION

Four weeks of HIIE training does not change BRS and its autonomic and vascular determinant in a sample of healthy adolescents at rest.

Interval exercise induces milder respiratory responses compared to continuous exercise

The purpose of this study was to explore the respiratory response of acute interval and continuous exercise (CE) of low and high intensity. Fourteen recreational athletes (7 men and 7 women; VO₂max = 35.7 ± 6.1 mlkg^-1min^-1) performed a bout of continuous and a bout of interval exercise (IE) both consisted of 5-min cycling at low intensity [80% of the power output (W) of the predetermined gas exchange threshold (GET) (80%W_GET)] and 5-min cycling at high intensity {W_GET plus the work rate corresponding to 50% of the difference between peak power output (PPO) at oxygen uptake (VO₂max) test and the W_GET [W_GET + 0.50 Δ(PPO - W_GET)]}. CE compared to IE induced significant higher heart rate and ventilation as well as significant higher levels of mouth occlusion pressure for 0.1 s (P_0.1) (P < 0.05) during low and high intensities. Our results indicate that CE stimulates respiration more than IE when the exercise is performed at the same relative intensity.