Trial reportFrontiers in medicine2026
Hemodynamic effects of cycle ergometry and low-intensity handgrip in patients with pulmonary hypertension.
Trial report in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In pulmonary hypertension (PH), the hemodynamic response to exercise during right heart catheterization (RHC) can unmask latent left heart disease, is associated with prognosis, and can facilitate the understanding of patient's symptoms and the pathophysiology of heart failure. As cycle ergometry isn't widely available, we compared the hemodynamic effects of ergometry with isometric handgrip exercise. Methods: This prospective study included 50 consecutive patients (mean age 68 ± 12 years, 54% female) with suspected or confirmed PH who underwent RHC. In a semi-recumbent position, hemodynamic parameters were recorded at rest and during both randomized exercise modalities, each sustained for a mean of 6-7 min and separated by another resting phase. Cardiac output was determined by thermodilution. Handgrip pressure was set to 20% of maximal force, while cycle ergometry was performed at a constant work rate between 10 and 50 watts. Results: Both modalities induced significant changes of hemodynamic parameters compared to baseline, which were considerably smaller during handgrip. Mean pulmonary arterial pressure increased by 14 mmHg under cycling vs. 4 mmHg under handgrip ( Discussion: Compared with cycle ergometry, low-intensity isometric handgrip exercise at 20% of maximal force produces significantly smaller alterations in hemodynamic parameters measured by RHC in PH patients, and thus is not suitable as an adequate substitute for the established exercise modality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.