4.7 Article

Electrical Properties Assessed by Bioelectrical Impedance Spectroscopy as Biomarkers of Age-related Loss of Skeletal Muscle Quantity and Quality

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/gerona/glw225

关键词

Bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy; Contractile muscle tissue; Membrane capacitance

资金

  1. National Institute on Aging [P01-AG020166]
  2. General Clinical Research Centers Program
  3. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health [UL1TR000427]
  4. JSPS KAKENHI [15H05363]
  5. NIH/NIA [AG047358]
  6. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15H05363] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Skeletal muscle, in addition to being comprised of a heterogeneous muscle fiber population, also includes extracellular components that do not contribute to positive tensional force production. Here we test segmental bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy (S-BIS) to assess muscle intracellular mass and composition. S-BIS can evaluate electrical properties that may be related to muscle force production. Muscle fiber membranes separate the intracellular components from the extracellular environment and consist of lipid bilayers which act as an electrical capacitor. We found that S-BIS measures accounted for similar to 85% of the age-related decrease in appendicular muscle power compared with only similar to 49% for dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measures. Indices of extracellular (noncontractile) and cellular (contractile) compartments in skeletal muscle tissues were determined using the Cole-Cole plot from S-BIS measures. Characteristic frequency, membrane capacitance, and phase angle determined by Cole-Cole analysis together presented a S-BIS complex model that explained similar to 79% of interindividual variance of leg muscle power. This finding underscores the value of S-BIS to measure muscle composition rather than lean mass as measured by DXA and suggests that S-BIS should be highly informative in skeletal muscle physiology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据