4.6 Article

Evidence of local exercise-induced systemic oxidative stress in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients

期刊

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 1123-1129

出版社

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.02.00014302

关键词

endurance; myopathy; quadriceps; reactive oxygen species; vitamin E

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic inactivity may not be the sole factor involved in the myopathy of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. One hypothesis is that exercise-induced oxidative stress that leads to muscle alterations may also be involved. This study investigated whether exercise localised to a peripheral muscle group would induce oxidative stress in COPD patients. Eleven COPD patients (FEV1 1.15+/-0.4 L (mean+/-SD)) and 12 healthy age-matched subjects with a similar low quantity of physical activity performed endurance exercise localised to a peripheral muscle group, the quadriceps of the dominant leg. The authors measured plasma levels of thiobarbituric reactive substances (TBARs) as an index of oxidative stress, the release in superoxide anion (O-2(.-)) by stimulated phagocytes as an oxidant, and blood vitamin E as one antioxidant. Quadriceps endurance was significantly lower in the COPD patients compared with healthy subjects (136+/-16 s versus 385+/-69 s (mean+/-SEM), respectively). A significant increase in TBARs 6 h after quadriceps exercise was only found in the COPD patients. In addition, significantly higher O-2(.-) release and lower blood vitamin E levels were found in COPD patients than in controls at rest. This blood vitamin E level was significantly correlated with the resting level of plasma TBARs in the COPD patients. This study mainly showed that quadriceps exercise induced systemic oxidative stress in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients and that vitamin E levels were decreased in these patients at rest. The exact relevance of these findings to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease myopathy needs to be elucidated.

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

4.6
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