4.5 Article

Aerobic training status does not attenuate prolonged sitting-induced lower limb vascular dysfunction

Journal

APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY NUTRITION AND METABOLISM
Volume 44, Issue 4, Pages 425-433

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING, NRC RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/apnm-2018-0420

Keywords

prolonged sitting; vascular function; aerobic training; passive leg movement; shear stress; nitric oxide

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined if the degree of aerobic training protects against the lower limb vascular dysfunction associated with a prolonged sitting bout. Ten young, aerobically trained (AT) and 10 young, untrained (UT) individuals completed a prolonged (3 h) sitting bout. Leg vascular function was measured prior to and at 1.5 and 3 h into the prolonged sitting bout using the passive leg movement (PLM) technique. PLM-induced hyperemia was significantly reduced from baseline at 1.5 and 3 h into the prolonged sitting bout in both groups when evaluated as peak change in leg blood flow from baseline (Delta LBF) (UT: 956 +/- 140, 586 +/- 80, and 599 +/- 96 mL.min(-1) at baseline, 1.5 h, and 3 h, respectively; AT: 955 +/- 183, 789 +/- 193, and 712 +/- 131 mL.min(-1) at baseline, 1.5 h, and 3 h, respectively) and LBF area under the curve (UT: 283 +/- 73, 134 +/- 31, and 164 +/- 42 mL.min(-1) at baseline, 1.5 h, and 3 h, respectively; AT: 336 +/- 86, 242 +/- 86, and 245 +/- 73 mL.min(-1) at baseline, 1.5 h, and 3 h, respectively), but no significant differences between groups were revealed. No significant correlations were observed when examining the relationship between maximal oxygen uptake (relative and absolute) and reductions in leg vascular function at 1.5 and 3 h into the prolonged sitting bout. This study revealed that aerobic training did not provide a protective effect against prolonged sitting-induced lower limb vascular dysfunction and further highlights the importance of reducing excessive sitting in all populations.

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