The main finding of this study was a difference in segmental systolic myocardial function between trained and untrained females, despite similar overall and regional cardiac function, as well as a similar degree of dyssynchrony. However, indexing peak systolic velocities by the increased cardiac length of ATH eradicated statistical significance in all segments but one.
Systolic timing and synchrony
The normal heart is not perfectly synchronised, owing to a non-uniformity in ventricular geometry, architecture and fibre orientation, in combination with regional differences in electrical activation and activation-contraction coupling.21 Although increased dyssynchrony has been found in patients with pathological hypertrophy (ie, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy),10 little is known regarding the synchrony in endurance trained athletes with physiological hypertrophy compared with sedentary participants.
We found similar interventricular and intraventricular synchrony in trained and untrained females implicating that chronic endurance exercise in females, albeit associated with substantial cardiac remodelling, does not impose systolic mechanical dyssynchrony compared with untrained females. Thus, dyssynchrony above what is generally reported in females14 ,22 does not seem to be a physiological adaptation to endurance exercise and should merit further investigation if present in an athlete, bearing in mind, for example, previous findings of increased dyssynchrony in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.10 Furthermore, we showed that available cut-off values used in heart failure patients17–19 cannot be applied in determining an abnormal level of dyssynchrony in endurance athletes, which is in line with previous studies on healthy participants.14 ,15
Less than a handful of studies have compared cardiac synchrony in athletes and sedentary participants. Two studies have used 3D echocardiography to calculate a dyssynchrony index normalised by cardiac cycle length (SDI %).12 ,13 No difference was observed between their cohorts of healthy participants versus male soccer players12 and Olympic athletes of different sports, respectively.13 In the latter study by Caselli et al,13 a tendency (p=0.058) towards a lower degree of SDI % in athletes was reported, which could be a result of indexing by longer cardiac cycles (ie, lower heart rate) in athletes. Finally, using similar dyssynchrony indices as in the current study, Sahlén et al11 reported larger S-L-delay in 20 male first-time runners (age 48±8 years) compared with 23 repeat runners (age 46±6 years) prior to a 30 km race. Interestingly, they found that after the race, dyssynchrony increased significantly only in first-time runners and was correlated to an increase in biochemical markers of cardiac damage. Altogether, the few and diverse available studies call for further research.
Overall and regional LV and RV systolic function
Our results of a preserved overall LV systolic function together with enlarged cardiac dimensions in trained females depict the physiological hypertrophy seen with endurance training. There is a multitude of reports on normal LVEF at rest in trained participants.2 ,4 ,5 In males, average basal LV-s′ is typically reported to be similar in endurance athletes and sedentary controls,9 ,23 ,24 while global peak systolic longitudinal LV strain is either reported as similar24 or lower6 ,25 in different samples of trained versus untrained participants.
However, mean RV-s′ was found to be higher in ATH than in CON, which could imply an adaptation in resting RV longitudinal systolic function following endurance training in females. This may seem logical as the RV is more dependent on longitudinal shortening than the LV,26 and an augmentation in RV longitudinal function in athletes is supported by previous cross-sectional echocardiographic studies using M-mode3 ,27 and TDI.8 ,9 ,28 ,29 However, when accounting for increased cardiac length, these differences have been shown to diminish.9 Indeed, results are more conflicting from studies measuring RV strain,7 ,8 which has been found unrelated to RV size.30 Our results indicate that previous results on increased cardiac longitudinal function must be interpreted with caution, and future studies should either account for cardiac length or apply relative measures of cardiac function.
Segmental LV and RV systolic function
Peak systolic velocity was higher in ATH than in CON in RV segments studied as well as in segments adjacent to the RV, while the opposite was seen in the basal LV lateral wall. This could imply that either the free RV wall and septum adapt to endurance training in a similar fashion, possibly augmenting RV longitudinal shortening, or that an adaptation in RV longitudinal function influences septal movement. The septum is an important factor in ventricular interdependence, and both circumferential and longitudinal muscle fibres from the RV free wall traverse into the interventricular septum.31 Interestingly, training-induced changes in RV dimension and longitudinal systolic function have shown a negative correlation with changes in septal circumferential strain at the mid-ventricular level.32 Altogether, there could be a shift from circumferential towards longitudinal shortening in the mid-ventricular septum of endurance athletes. This needs to be confirmed in future studies, ideally in male as well as in female athletes, and the practical implications remain to be elucidated.
There are no available studies describing segmental systolic myocardial function in female athletes. However, there are some conflicting results from studies on predominately male participants examining individual LV segments, most often constrained to basal s′ in LV septal and lateral walls. These two measures have been found either concomitantly higher in ATH than in CON,8 ,33 higher only in septum34 ,35 or concomitantly similar between groups.28 ,36 ,37 In addition, a few studies report segmental strain in the same two segments to be either concomitantly similar,36 concomitantly higher37 in ATH than in CON or higher in CON in the basal septum but not in the basal lateral LV wall.38 Reports on RV segmental strain are equally conflicting.7 ,8 ,28 ,36
So how does one explain these seemingly inconsistent results in endurance athletes? First, there is a large variation in the athletic populations studied, ranging from rowers8 ,33 ,34 and cyclists23 ,24 ,35 to soccer players,6 ,9 ,36 and thus, training protocols will vary considerably. Cardiac function may also change with increasing age or duration of training. Our results apply to young females. Second, the characteristics of the included control group are of importance when searching for sometimes subtle differences between groups, and an objective measure of the physical conditioning of control participants is not always presented. Third, the methodology used for assessing myocardial function varies, especially for strain imaging, with different vendors and software platforms being used, and what measures and settings to apply is not fully determined. Considering the factors outlined above and with newer echocardiographic techniques continuously evolving, care must be taken in standardisation and validation of measurements, as well as in selection and description of participants in future studies.
There are some relevant limitations of the current study. First, although we report segmental tissue velocity data for both ventricles, our study protocol did not include RV strain measurements, which would be a measure independent of the increased cardiac length of athletes. Second, we chose to omit apical measurements on theoretical grounds—as it is doubtful that adequate longitudinal function measurements can be obtained in these segments—as well as on practical grounds, as these were not obtainable in some subjects. Third, the athletes included participated in a variety of endurance sports, all categorised as having a high-dynamic component according to the Mitchell classification.39 The amount of static component in the respective sports included, however, varied. As the study was not powered to allow for comparisons between different sports, the impact of the static component in high-dynamic sports on the female athlete's heart was not addressed in this study. Possibly, this may to some extent explain previously conflicting results from studies investigating cardiac function in endurance athletes. Fourth, this study included exclusively young female endurance athletes, which has implication in generalising the results to older athletes and males. Finally, the inter-rater and intra-rater variability should always be considered. At least for strain measurements, this could in part be attributed to inherent limitations of the software algorithms, where small corrections of the width and placement of the region of interest may have large impact on strain data. This could contribute to the somewhat conflicting results from previous studies.
In conclusion, we found differences in segmental myocardial systolic function between trained and untrained females that imply there are adaptations in cardiac function at rest following endurance training not apparent with global measures of systolic function. As differences in segmental peak systolic velocities were clearly affected by cardiac length, a length-independent measure of systolic function, such as strain, may be preferable in athlete-control studies. Moreover, our finding of similar interventricular and intraventricular synchrony in trained and untrained participants could aid in sports cardiological evaluations.