Hypertension is a ubiquitous and serious disease. Regular exercise has been recommended as a strategy for the prevention and treatment of hypertension because of its effects in reducing clinical blood pressure; however, ambulatory blood pressure is a better predictor of target-organ damage than clinical blood pressure, and therefore studying the effects of exercise on ambulatory blood pressure is important as well. Moreover, different kinds of exercise might produce distinct effects that might differ between normotensive and hypertensive subjects.The aim of this study was to review the current literature on the acute and chronic effects of aerobic and resistance exercise on ambulatory blood pressure in normotensive and hypertensive subjects. It has been conclusively shown that a single episode of aerobic exercise reduces ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Similarly, regular aerobic training also decreases ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive individuals. In contrast, data on the effects of resistance exercise is both scarce and controversial. Nevertheless, studies suggest that resistance exercise might acutely decrease ambulatory blood pressure after exercise, and that this effect seems to be greater after low-intensity exercise and in patients receiving anti-hypertensive drugs. On the other hand, only two studies investigating resistance training in hypertensive patients have been conducted, and neither has demonstrated any hypotensive effect. Thus, based on current knowledge, aerobic training should be recommended to decrease ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive individuals, while resistance exercise could be prescribed as a complementary strategy.

Due to differences in study populations and protocols, the hemodynamic determinants of post-aerobic exercise hypotension (PAEH) are controversial. This review analyzed the factors that might influence PAEH hemodynamic determinants, through a search on PubMed using the following key words: “postexercise” or “post-exercise” combined with “hypotension”, “blood pressure”, “cardiac output”, and “peripheral vascular resistance”, and “aerobic exercise” combined only with “blood pressure”. Forty-seven studies were selected, and the following characteristics were analyzed: age, gender, training status, body mass index status, blood pressure status, exercise intensity, duration and mode (continuous or interval), time of day, and recovery position. Data analysis showed that 1) most postexercise hypotension cases are due to a reduction in systemic vascular resistance; 2) age, body mass index, and blood pressure status influence postexercise hemodynamics, favoring cardiac output decrease in elderly, overweight, and hypertensive subjects; 3) gender and training status do not have an isolated influence; 4) exercise duration, intensity, and mode also do not affect postexercise hemodynamics; 5) time of day might have an influence, but more data are needed; and 6) recovery in the supine position facilitates systemic vascular resistance decrease. In conclusion, many factors may influence postexercise hypotension hemodynamics, and future studies should directly address these specific influences because different combinations may explain the observed variability in postexercise hemodynamic studies.

To compare post-resistance exercise hypotension (PREH) and its mechanisms in normotensive and hypertensive individuals, 14 normotensives and 12 hypertensives underwent two experimental sessions: control (rest) and exercise (seven exercises, three sets, 50% of one repetition maximum). Hemodynamic and autonomic clinic measurements were taken before (Pre) and at two moments post-interventions (Post 1: between 30 and 60 min; Post 2: after 7 h). Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) was monitored for 24 h. At Post 1, exercise decreased systolic BP similarly in normotensives and hypertensives (-8 ± 2 vs -13 ± 2 mmHg, P > 0.05), whereas diastolic BP decreased more in hypertensives (-4 ± 1 vs -9 ± 1 mmHg, P < 0.05). Cardiac output and systemic vascular resistance did not change in normotensives and hypertensives (0.0 ± 0.3 vs 0.0 ± 0.3 L/min; -1 ± 1 vs -2 ± 2 U, P > 0.05). After exercise, heart rate (+13 ± 3 vs +13 ± 2 bpm) and its variability (low- to high-frequency components ratio, 1.9 ± 0.4 vs +1.4 ± 0.3) increased whereas stroke volume (-14 ± 5 vs -11 ± 5 mL) decreased similarly in normotensives and hypertensives (all, P > 0.05). At Post 2, all variables returned to pre-intervention, and ambulatory data were similar between sessions. Thus, a session of resistance exercise promoted PREH in normotensives and hypertensives. Although this PREH was greater in hypertensives, it did not last during the ambulatory period, which limits its clinical relevance. In addition, the mechanisms of PREH were similar in hypertensives and normotensives.

This study investigated clinic and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) responses after a single bout of low-intensity resistance exercise in normotensive subjects. Fifteen healthy subjects underwent 2 experimental sessions: control-40 minutes of seated rest, and exercise-6 resistance exercises, with 3 sets of as many repetitions as possible until moderate fatigue, with an intensity of 50% of 1-repetition maximum (1RM). Before and for 60 minutes after interventions, clinic BP was measured by auscultatory and oscillometric methods. Postintervention ambulatory BP levels were also measured for 24 hours. In comparison with preintervention values, clinic systolic BP, as measured by the auscultatory method, did not change in the control group, but it decreased after exercise (-3.7 +/- 1.6 mm Hg, p < 0.05). Diastolic and mean BP levels increased after intervention in the control group (+3.4 +/- 1.0 and +3.0 +/- 0.8 mm Hg, respectively, p < 0.05) and decreased in the exercise group (-3.6 +/- 1.7 and -3.4 +/- 1.4 mm Hg, respectively, p < 0.05). Systolic and mean oscillometric BP levels did not change after interventions either in the control or exercise sessions, whereas diastolic BP increased after intervention in the control group (+5.0 +/- 1.7 mm Hg, p < 0.05) but not change after exercise. Ambulatory BP behaviors after interventions were similar in the control and exercise sessions. Significant and positive correlations were observed between preexercise values and postexercise clinic and ambulatory BP decreases. In conclusion, in the whole sample, a single bout of low-intensity resistance exercise decreased postexercise BP under clinic, but not ambulatory, conditions. However, considering individual responses, postexercise clinic and ambulatory hypotensive effects were greater in subjects with higher preexercise BP levels.

Post-resistance exercise hypotension has been extensively described in men and women. However, gender influence on this response has not yet been clear. Gender might change post-exercise hemodynamics, since men and women respond differently during exercise. Thus, the purpose was to compare post-resistance exercise hypotension and its hemodynamic determinants in men and women. Normotensive subjects (22-male, 22-female) underwent 2 sessions: control (40 min of rest) and exercise (6 resistance exercises, 3 sets, 20 repetitions, at 40-50% of 1RM). Blood pressure, heart rate, and cardiac output were measured prior to and following interventions. Blood pressure decrease after exercise was similar between the genders. However, hemodynamic determinants responded differently in men and women. Systemic vascular resistance reduced in women (-4.6±1.9U, P<0.05), while cardiac output decreased in men (-0.6±0.2 L/min, P<0.05). This response was accompanied by a decrease in stroke volume in men (-21.6±5.1 ml, P<0.05) and a more pronounced increase in heart rate in men than in women (+11.3±1.3 vs. +6.5±1.7 bpm, P<0.05, respectively). In conclusion, post-resistance exercise hypotension was similar in men and women. However, its hemodynamic determinants differ between the genders, depending on cardiac output decrease in men and on systemic vascular resistance decrease in women.

The effects of high-intensity progressive resistance training (HIPRT) on cardiovascular function and autonomic neural regulation in older adults are unclear. To investigate this issue, 25 older adults were randomly divided into two groups: control (CON, N = 13, 63 ± 4 years; no training) and HIPRT (N = 12, 64 ± 4 years; 2 sessions/week, 7 exercises, 2–4 sets, 10–4 RM). Before and after four months, maximal strength, quadriceps cross-sectional area (QCSA), clinic and ambulatory blood pressures (BP), systemic hemodynamics, and cardiovascular autonomic modulation were measured. Maximal strength and QCSA increased in the HIPRT group and did not change in the CON group. Clinic and ambulatory BP, cardiac output, systemic vascular resistance, stroke volume, heart rate, and cardiac sympathovagal balance did not change in the HIPRT group or the CON group. In conclusion, HIPRT was effective at increasing muscle mass and strength without promoting changes in cardiovascular function or autonomic neural regulation.

Resistance training increases muscle strength in older adults, decreasing the effort necessary for executing physical tasks, and reducing cardiovascular load during exercise. This hypothesis has been confirmed during strength-based activities, but not during aerobic-based activities. This study determined whether different resistance training regimens, strength training (ST, constant movement velocity) or power training (PT, concentric phase performed as fast as possible) can blunt the increase in cardiovascular load during an aerobic stimulus. Older adults (63.9 ± 0.7 years) were randomly allocated to: control (N = 11), ST (N = 13, twice a week, 70-90% 1-RM) and PT (N = 15, twice a week, 30-50% 1-RM) groups. Before and after 16 weeks, oxygen uptake (VO 2 ), systolic blood pressure (SBP), heart rate (HR), and rate pressure product (RPP) were measured during a maximal treadmill test. Resting SBP and RPP were similarly reduced in all groups (combined data = -5.7 ± 1.2 and -5.0 ± 1.7%, respectively, P < 0.05). Maximal SBP, HR and RPP did not change. The increase in measured VO 2 , HR and RPP for the increment in estimated VO 2 (absolute load) decreased similarly in all groups (combined data = -9.1 ± 2.6, -14.1 ± 3.9, -14.2 ± 3.0%, respectively, P < 0.05), while the increments in the cardiovascular variables for the increase in measured VO 2 did not change. In elderly subjects, ST and PT did not blunt submaximal or maximal HR, SBP and RPP increases during the maximal exercise test, showing that they did not reduce cardiovascular stress during aerobic tasks.

Suggestions for professional mixed martial arts training with pacing strategy and technical-tactical actions by rounds. J Strength Cond Res 37(6): 1306-1314, 2023-This study compared the pacing strategy and motor actions used in mixed martial arts combats ending by knockout/technical knockout (KO/TKO) or submission. All of the sample bouts ended in KO/TKO and consisted of 1,564 rounds of 678 bouts. The bouts were separated by round (R) of bouts ending (ER) in the first round (n 5 192), first (1R 3 2ER) and second (2R 3 2ER) of bouts ending in the second round (n 5 172), and first (1R 3 3ER), second (2R 3 3ER), and third (3R 3 3ER) of bouts ending in the third round (n 5 1,200). The analyses were performed according to the duration (Δ) in each phase: Δ standing preparatory activity time, Δ standing combat activity time, Δ ground preparatory activity time, and Δ ground combat activity time and their technical-tactical actions (attempted and landed strikes to the head, body and leg, takedowns, and submissions). The main results demonstrated a shorter Δ standing preparatory activity time in 1R 3 1ER (95.6 6 62.9 seconds) and 2R 3 2ER (93.6 6 67.9 seconds) vs. 2R 3 3ER (160.5 6 87.4 seconds) and 3R 3 3ER (144.0 6 88.5 seconds) with fewer strikes attempted and landed to the head, body, and legs (p # 0.05). No differences were observed (p . 0.05) between Δ standing combat activity time, but lower attempted and landed takedowns and strikes to the head, body, and leg frequencies. There were shorter Δ ground combat activity time (p # 0.05) in 1R 3 1ER (23.4 6 45.5) and 2R 3 2ER (25.3 6 41.9) vs. 2R 3 3ER (50.4 6 69.9) and 3R 3 3ER (52.9 6 74.2), with lower attempted submissions, chokes, and attempted and landed strikes to the head, body, and leg frequencies observed. These results contribute to the information developed from current research to help improve the quality of training and promote effective athletic preparation related to pacing strategy and performance models.