No abstract

Recently, it has been reported that dietary supplementation with grape seed extract (GSE) ameliorates endothelial function and increase nitric oxide (NO) bioavailability. Thus, we investigated if elevated blood pressure and aortic stiffness (AoS) characterized in obese individuals are attenuated following acute GSE supplementation. Twenty men (obese510; normal body weight (NBW)510) participated in this study. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), stroke volume (SV), cardiac output (CO), total peripheral resistance (TPR), and AoS were compared 2 h after ingestion of GSE or placebo (PL) on different days, 1 wk apart. Compared with the PL, GSE supplementation significantly decreased SBP (NBW: 10364 vs. 9963 mmHg; obese: 11863 vs. 11265 mmHg) and MAP (NBW: 7562 vs. 7262 mmHg; obese: 8663 vs. 8463 mmHg) in both groups, while there were no differences in HR, SV, DBP, TPR, and AoS. GSE supplementation significantly decreased CO in only obese group. In NBW group, TPR tended to be decreased, but there was no significant difference. Our study suggests that acute supplementation with GSE reduced both SBP and MAP via a reduction in CO in obese individuals and decreased peripheral vasoconstriction in NBW group.

The purpose of this study was to determine if muscle strength influences the hyperemic response to dynamic exercise. Men with low (n=8) and high (n=9) maximal forearm strength performed dynamic handgrip exercise as the same absolute workload increased in a ramp function (0.5 kg x min (-1)). Forearm blood flow (FBF) was measured instantaneously by ultrasound Doppler and blood pressure was measured by auscultation. The pressor response to exercise was greater (P<0.05) for low strength men at workloads >1.5 kg allowing volumetric FBF (ml x min (-1)) and vascular conductance to increase in proportion to absolute workload similar to high strength men. When FBF was expressed relative to forearm volume (ml x min (-1).100 ml (-1)) the hyperemic response to exercise (slope of relative FBF vs. workload) was greater in low strength men (3.2+/-1.5 vs. 1.7+/-0.4 ml x min (-1).100 ml (-1) x kg (-1), P<0.05) as was relative FBF at workloads >1.5 kg. However, when relative FBF was compared across relative work intensity, no difference was found between low and high strength groups. Together, these findings suggest men with low strength require a greater pressor response to match blood flow to exercise intensity as compared to high strength men.