ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Association of aortic root diameter and vascular function with an exaggerated blood pressure response to exercise among elite athletes.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Future directions and challenges in sports cardiology: interplay between blood pressure response and aortic remodeling in athletes.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Critical insights on association of aortic root diameter and vascular function with an exaggerated blood pressure response to exercise among elite athletes.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Total Thrombus-Formation Analysis System (T-TAS) in Aortopathies: A Conceptual and Potential Framework to Spatial Heterogeneity and Regional Context.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe systolic blood pressure/workload (SBP/MET) slope was recently reported to reliably identify an exaggerated blood pressure response (eBPR) in the normal population and in athletes. We investigated whether the aortic root diameter (AoD) also correlates with an eBPR and vascular function in elite athletes.
methodsWe examined 652 healthy male elite athletes (age 25.8 ± 5 years) of mixed sports with a standardized maximum exercise test. Central blood pressure and vascular function were measured non-invasively with a validated oscillometric device. The SBP/MET slope was calculated and the threshold for an eBPR was set at > 6.2 mmHg/MET. Two groups were defined (≤ 6.2 and > 6.2 mmHg/MET), and an association between AoD and vascular function with the SBP/MET slope was evaluated for each group.
resultsAthletes with an eBPR (n = 191, 29%) displayed a higher systolic central BP (103 ± 7.7 vs. 101 ± 9.2 mmHg, p = 0.004), larger AoD (32.8 ± 3.3 vs. 31.9. ± 3.2 mm, p < 0.001), a higher AoD/left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) ratio (0.62 ± 0.061 vs. 0.59. ± 0.056, p < 0.001), a lower LVEDD/AoD ratio (1.64 ± 0.16 vs. 1.69. ± 0.16, p < 0.001), and a lower absolute (299 ± 59 vs. 379 ± 65 W, p < 0.001) and relative workload (3.17 ± 0.55 vs. 4.05 ± 1.2 W/kg, p < 0.001) vs. athletes with a normal SBP/MET slope (n = 461, 71%). No differences between the two groups were found after indexing AoD to body surface area (BSA) (14.76 ± 1.36 vs. 14.73 ± 1.41, p = 0.772).
conclusionAthletes with eBPR displayed altered AoD/LVEDD and LVEDD/AoD ratios, whereas AoD/BSA indexing was not different. Further longitudinal studies are encouraged to explore these metrics and their role in aortic remodeling of athletes.
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.