Chronic anabolic androgenic steroid administration reduces global longitudinal strain among off-cycle bodybuilders

Anabolic-androgen steroids: A possible independent risk factor to Cardiovascular, Kidney and Metabolic Syndrome

Millions of individuals make illicit use of anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS), remaining a public health issue. It often leads to detrimental effects, including cardiovascular and renal diseases, besides hormonal and metabolic imbalances. The objective of this review is to emphasize the contribution of oxidative stress and inflammation to these effects and connect the findings of experimental animal studies with the alterations found in clinical contexts, in AAS users. The study's results showed that AAS promotes a redox disruption and a pro-inflammatory state on organs that are involved in important physiologic processes. These drugs increase inflammatory high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and cytokines that contribute to the progression of atherosclerosis, cardiovascular disease risk or endpoints, including stroke, myocardial infarction and death. In the kidney, the AAS increase proteinuria and structural damage. Studies have linked AAS abuse with high BP, low HDL-C levels, high triglyceride levels and impaired fasting blood glucose that characterize Metabolic syndrome. Overall, the studies indicate that oxidative stress, apoptosis, and AAS-mediated inflammation play a significant role in tissue damage, regardless of the dose and duration of exposure, and we point it as a putative independent risk factor to Cardiovascular, Kidney and Metabolic syndrome.

Exploring the prevalence of anabolic steroid use among men and women resistance training practitioners after the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on individual health and fitness routines globally. Resistance training, in particular, has become increasingly popular among men and women looking to maintain or improve their physical fitness during the pandemic. However, using Anabolic Steroids (AS) for performance enhancement in resistance training has known adverse effects. Thus, this study aimed to explore the prevalence of AS use among men and women resistance training practitioners after the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 3,603 resistance training practitioners (1,855 men and 1,748 women) in various geographical locations impacted by COVID-19. The participants were asked to complete self-administered questionnaires, which included questions regarding demographic information, training habits, and current or prior usage of AS. The data were analyzed using SPSS statistical software and the chi-square method, with a significance level of (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

A total of 3603 men and women resistance training practitioners completed the survey. In the study, 53.05% of men and 41.99% of women used anabolic and androgenic steroids. Of those men who used steroids, 29.47% used Testosterone, while 31.20% of women used Winstrol. Additionally, 50.30% of men used steroids via injection, while 49.05% of women used them orally. According to the study, 49.99% of the participants had 6 to 12 months of experience with resistance training, and 64.25% of them underwent three training sessions per week. The analysis using the χ2 test did not reveal any significant difference between men and women in terms of duration of bodybuilding, frequency per week, and engagement in other activities.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that a significant proportion of men and women resistance training practitioners used AS, particularly among young adults with limited training experience. Thus, there is a need for targeted education and awareness campaigns to address the hazards of AS use and promote healthy training habits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of image and performance enhancing drugs on atrial structure and function in resistance trained individuals

BACKGROUND

Image and performance enhancing drugs (IPEDs) are commonly used in resistance trained (RT) individuals and negatively impact left ventricular (LV) structure and function. Few studies have investigated the impact of IPEDs on atrial structure and function with no previous studies investigating bi-atrial strain. Additionally, the impact of current use vs. past use of IPEDs is unclear.

METHODS

Utilising a cross-sectional design, male (n = 81) and female (n = 15) RT individuals were grouped based on IPED user status: current (n = 57), past (n = 19) and non-users (n = 20). Participants completed IPED questionnaires, anthropometrical measurements, electrocardiography, and transthoracic echocardiography with strain imaging. Structural cardiac data was allometrically scaled to body surface area (BSA) according to laws of geometric similarity.

RESULTS

Body mass and BSA were greater in current users than past and non-users of IPEDs (p < 0.01). Absolute left atrial (LA) volume (60 ± 17 vs 46 ± 12, p = 0.001) and right atrial (RA) area (19 ± 4 vs 15 ± 3, p < 0.001) were greater in current users than non-users but this difference was lost following scaling (p > 0.05). Left atrial reservoir (p = 0.008, p < 0.001) and conduit (p < 0.001, p < 0.001) strain were lower in current users than past and non-users (conduit: current = 22 ± 6, past = 29 ± 9 and non-users = 31 ± 7 and reservoir: current = 33 ± 8, past = 39 ± 8, non-users = 42 ± 8). Right atrial reservoir (p = 0.015) and conduit (p = 0.007) strain were lower in current than non-users (conduit: current = 25 ± 8, non-users = 33 ± 10 and reservoir: current = 36 ± 10, non-users = 44 ± 13). Current users showed reduced LV diastolic function (A wave: p = 0.022, p = 0.049 and E/A ratio: p = 0.039, p < 0.001) and higher LA stiffness (p = 0.001, p < 0.001) than past and non-users (A wave: current = 0.54 ± 0.1, past = 0.46 ± 0.1, non-users = 0.47 ± 0.09 and E/A ratio: current = 1.5 ± 0.5, past = 1.8 ± 0.4, non-users = 1.9 ± 0.4, LA stiffness: current = 0.21 ± 0.7, past = 0.15 ± 0.04, non-users = 0.15 ± 0.07).

CONCLUSION

Resistance trained individuals using IPEDs have bi-atrial enlargement that normalises with allometric scaling, suggesting that increased size is, in part, associated with increased body size. The lower LA and RA reservoir and conduit strain and greater absolute bi-atrial structural parameters in current than non-users of IPEDs suggests pathological adaptation with IPED use, although the similarity in these parameters between past and non-users suggests reversibility of pathological changes with withdrawal.