4.6 Article

Effects of antecedent prolonged exercise on subsequent counterregulatory responses to hypoglycemia

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpendo.2001.280.6.E908

关键词

glucose clamp; epinephrine; glucagon

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01-RR-00095] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIADDK NIH HHS [5P60-AM-20593] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK-45369] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study the hypothesis tested was that prior exercise may blunt counterregulatory responses to subsequent hypoglycemia. Healthy subjects [15 females (f)/15 males (m), age 27 +/- 1 yr, body mass index 22 +/- 1 kg/m(2), hemoglobin A(Ic) 5.6 +/- 0.5%] were studied during 2-day experiments. Day 1 involved either 90-min morning and afternoon cycle exercise at 50% maximal O-2 uptake ((V) over dot O-2 max) (priorEXE, n = 16, 8 m/8 f) or equivalent rest periods (priorREST, n = 14, 7 m/7 f). Day 2 consisted of a 2-h hypoglycemic clamp in all subjects. Endogenous glucose production (EGP) was measured using [3-H-3]glucose. Muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) was measured using microneurography. Day 2 insulin (87 +/- 6 muU/ml) and plasma glucose levels (54 +/- 2 mg/dl) were equivalent after priorEXE and priorREST. Significant blunting (P < 0.01) of day 2 norepinephrine (-30 +/- 4%), epinephrine (-37 +/- 6%), glucagon (-60 +/- 4%), growth hormone (-61 +/- 5%), pancreatic polypeptide (-47 +/- 4%), and MSNA (-90 +/- 8%) responses to hypoglycemia occurred after priorEXE vs. priorREST. EGP during day 2 hypoglycemia was also suppressed significantly (P < 0.01) after priorEXE compared with priorREST. In summary, two bouts of exercise (90 min at 50% (V) over dot O-2 max) significantly reduced glucagon, cat echolamines, growth hormone, pancreatic polypeptide, and EGP responses to subsequent hypoglycemia. We conclude that, in normal humans, antecedent prolonged moderate exercise blunts neuroendocrine and metabolic counterregulatory responses to subsequent hypoglycemia.

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