English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Aims The aim of this multicentre registry was to verify the association between an exaggerated blood pressure response (EBPR) to exercise stress test (EST) and evidence of previous myocardial and/or brain ischaemic events in the general population. Methods and results All subjects who underwent EST for screening of ischaemic heart disease and/or follow-up and re-evaluation of heart disease were included in the registry. Patients who discontinued EST due to early muscle exhaustion, younger individuals (&amp;lt;18 years), patients with potentially dangerous channelopathies or ventricular arrhythmias, as well as those with disabling chronic diseases or experiencing cardiovascular events in the 3 months prior to TE. Everyone performed EST on a treadmill or cycle ergometer using similar protocols in the various centres. Based on some study in the literature, we identified the EBPR to exercise for a systolic BP rise &amp;gt;60 mmHg (men) or &amp;gt; 50 mmHg (women) compared to pre-exercise baseline measurement, but also an absolute value &amp;gt;210 or &amp;gt; 190 mmHg, respectively. Retrospectively, we verified the presence of non-disabling ischaemic cardiac and cerebrovascular events over the past 10 years. Five hundred and three subjects of mean age 61 ± 11 years were included in the registry. EST was performed on a treadmill in 65% of subjects and maximal workload was achieved by 75% of them. Subjects with EBPR were 170 (34%) vs. 333 (66%) who had normal response (controls). EBPR group included most male subjects, often overweight and with a higher prevalence of diabetes (31% vs. 20% in the control group, P &amp;lt; 0.01), and with already diagnosed arterial hypertension in a half of cases. Previous ischaemic myocardial events were found in 35% of EBPR subjects vs. 36% of controls (P = NS), while cerebrovascular disease in 20% vs. 10%, respectively (P &amp;lt; 0.005). Conclusion Albeit retrospectively performed, this multicentre registry highlighted an association between EBPR to exercise (present in more than one-third of the subjects examined, especially males) and history of cerebrovascular ischaemic events within 10 years prior to enrolment. In line with previous studies, present data confirmed a clinical impact of EBPR on exercise. However, the precise pathophysiological mechanism(s) need to be clarified yet, also in terms of therapies against such exaggerated functional response and its possible prognostic impact over time.

248 Association between abnormal blood pressure response to exercise and incident cardiovascular events