ArticlePloS one2016
Aortic Function's Adaptation in Response to Exercise-Induced Stress Assessing by 1.5T MRI: A Pilot Study in Healthy Volunteers.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exercise cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a feasibility study and meta-analysis.American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology · 2018Pooled it
- Investigating the potential of the isometric handgrip exercise as a test of cardiovascular reactivity to blood pressure fluctuations.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Observational
- The kinocardiograph for assessment of changes in haemodynamic load in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
- Investigating heartbeat-related in-plane motion and stress levels induced at the aortic root.Biomedical engineering online · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimEvaluation of the aortic "elastic reserve" might be a relevant marker to assess the risk of aortic event. Our aim was to compare regional aortic elasticity at rest and during supine bicycle exercise at 1.5 T MRI in healthy individuals.
methodsFifteen volunteers (8 men), with a mean age of 29 (23-41) years, completed the entire protocol. Images were acquired immediately following maximal exercise. Retrospective cine sequences were acquired to assess compliance, distensibility, maximum rates of systolic distension and diastolic recoil at four different locations: ascending aorta, proximal descending aorta, distal descending aorta and aorta above the coeliac trunk level. Segmental aortic pulse wave velocity (PWV) was assessed by through plane velocity-encoded MRI.
resultsExercise induced a significant decrease of aortic compliance and distensibility, and a significant increase of the absolute values of maximum rates of systolic distension and diastolic recoil at all sites (p<10-3). At rest and during stress, ascending aortic compliance was statistically higher compared to the whole descending aorta (p≤0.0007). We found a strong correlation between the rate pressure product and aortic distensibility at all sites (r = - 0.6 to -0.75 according to the site, p<10-4). PWV measured at the proximal and distal descending aorta increased significantly during stress (p = 0.02 and p = 0.008, respectively).
conclusionAssessment of regional aortic function during exercise is feasible using MRI. During stress, aortic elasticity decreases significantly in correlation with an increase of the PWV. Further studies are required to create thresholds for ascending aorta dysfunction among patients with aneurysms, and to monitor the impact of medication on aortic remodeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.