4.0 Article

Influence of repeated isometric contractions on muscle deoxygenation and pulmonary oxygen uptake kinetics in humans

期刊

CLINICAL PHYSIOLOGY AND FUNCTIONAL IMAGING
卷 24, 期 4, 页码 229-236

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2004.00554.x

关键词

near-infrared spectroscopy; rhythmic isometric exercise; skeletal muscle; time constant; VO2 slow component

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of the present study was to compare simultaneously vastus lateralis (VL) deoxygenation and pulmonary O-2 uptake ((V) over dot O-2) kinetics during fatiguing knee extension exercise with minimal cardiac load. Eight healthy subjects realized an intermittent bilateral knee-extension exercise (3-s contraction/3-s relaxation) at 40% of maximum voluntary contraction for 10 min. VL deoxygenation was recorded by near infrared spectroscopy at 2 Hz (NIRO-300, Hamamatsu Photonics, Japan) and (V) over dot O-2 was determined breath-by-breath (K4b(2), Cosmed, Italy). After a time delay of 16 +/- 5 s, deoxygenation kinetics at the onset of exercise followed an exponential time course at a significant faster rate than (V) over dot O-2 (time constant of 5.4 +/- 4.0 s vs. 31.6 +/- 10.4 s, P<0.01) reflecting a mismatch between local O-2 consumption and perfusion. Thereafter, a rise in (V) over dot O-2 of 223 +/- 123 ml min(-1) (consistent with the mathematical model, 259 +/- 126 ml min(-1)) was observed between minutes 2 and 10. During the same exercise time, changes in tissue oxygenation index decreased significantly and were individually correlated with the corresponding increased (V) over dot O-2 (P<0.05), suggesting that the majority of the slow rise of (V) over dot O-2 arose from the exercising limbs. Averaged heart rate increased from 67 +/- 11 to 116 +/- 20 beats min(-1) during exercise. Knee extension exercise may be relevant to estimate the cardiopulmonary and deoxygenation of working skeletal muscle responses for assessment of exercise limiting factors in clinical settings or in the exercise 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

4.0
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