4.5 Article

Oxidative stress in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients submitted to a rehabilitation program

Journal

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
Volume 101, Issue 8, Pages 1830-1835

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2007.02.004

Keywords

COPD; oxidative stress; physical exercise; pulmonary rehabilitation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves physical capacity and health quality in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the effect of exercise on oxidative stress markers in COPD patients is only partially known. This study was designed to evaluate the oxidative stress response to long-term exercise in patients with COPD enrolled in a PR program. Fifteen COPD patients (FEV1 < 60%), age between 50 and 60 years, ex-smokers, were separated in two groups: exercise-trained (n = 8) and sedentary group (n = 7). Exercise consisted of an 8-week conditioning program using a cycle ergometer (three times a week, 1 h session). An endurance test (60% of maximal toad in an incremental cycle test) was performed before and after PR. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and immediately after each endurance test. We measured the index of lipid peroxidation, thiobarbituric acid reactive species (TBARS), total radical-trapping antioxidant parameter (TRAP) and xanthine oxidase (XO) activity. TRAP was significantly different between the exercise-trained group and sedentary group of COPD patients. Baseline TBARS values were increased after the exercise training program but decreased after the endurance test. XO decrease after effort in the trained and untrained groups. The results suggest that patients with COPD are characterized by increased systemic and pulmonary oxidative stress markers both at rest as well as induced by cardiopulmonary exercise test and that PR program was associated with decreased systemic exercise-induced oxidative damage. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available