ArticleExperimental physiology2024
Arterial function in response to a 50 km ultramarathon in recreational athletes.
Article in Experimental physiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Concurrent inflammatory, hemorheological and macrovascular responses to a 230-km ultramarathon: an exploratory study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Central blood pressure and arterial stiffness among ultramarathon runners across the lifespan.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Peripheral blood mononuclear cell number and paracrine function in responses to a 50-km trail race: An exploratory study.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- Acute cardiovascular responses to the 100-mi Western States Endurance Run.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2024Article
- Not like us: Exploring the cardiovascular consequences of ultramarathons.Experimental physiology · 2024Article
- Arterial function in response to a 50 km ultramarathon in recreational athletes.Experimental physiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study was performed to determine whether prolonged endurance running results in acute endothelial dysfunction and wave-reflection, as endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness are cardiovascular risk factors. Vascular function (conduit artery/macrovascular and resistance artery/microvascular) was assessed in 11 experienced runners (8 males, 3 females) before, during and after a 50 km ultramarathon. Blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), wave reflection, augmentation index (AIx) and AIx corrected for HR (AIx75) were taken at all time points-Baseline (BL), following 10, 20, 30 and 40 km, 1 h post-completion (1HP) and 24 h post-completion (24HP). Flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) and inflammatory biomarkers were examined at BL, 1HP and 24HP. Reactive hyperaemia area under the curve (AUC) and shear rate AUC to peak dilatation were lower (∼75%) at 1HP compared with BL (P < 0.001 for both) and reactive hyperaemia was higher at 24HP (∼27%) compared with BL (P = 0.018). Compared to BL, both mean central systolic BP and mean central diastolic BP were 7% and 10% higher, respectively, following 10 km and 6% and 9% higher, respectively, following 20 km, and then decreased by 5% and 8%, respectively, at 24HP (P < 0.05 for all). AIx (%) decreased following 20 km and following 40 km compared with BL (P < 0.05 for both) but increased following 40 km when corrected for HR (AIx75) compared with BL (P = 0.02). Forward wave amplitude significantly increased at 10 km (15%) compared with BL (P = 0.049), whereas backward wave reflection and reflected magnitude were similar at all time points. FMD and baseline diameter remained similar. These data indicate preservation of macrovascular (endothelial) function, but not microvascular function resulting from the 50 km ultramarathon.
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.