Cargando…
Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas
Assessment of forearm oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text] O(2)) during handgrip exercise is a keenly investigated concept for observing small muscle mass metabolism. Although a combination of Doppler ultrasound measurements of brachial artery blood flow ([Formula: see text]) and blood gas drawn from...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5974736/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29845765 http://dx.doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13696 |
_version_ | 1783326876974972928 |
---|---|
author | Nyberg, Stian K. Berg, Ole Kristian Helgerud, Jan Wang, Eivind |
author_facet | Nyberg, Stian K. Berg, Ole Kristian Helgerud, Jan Wang, Eivind |
author_sort | Nyberg, Stian K. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Assessment of forearm oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text] O(2)) during handgrip exercise is a keenly investigated concept for observing small muscle mass metabolism. Although a combination of Doppler ultrasound measurements of brachial artery blood flow ([Formula: see text]) and blood gas drawn from a deep forearm vein has been utilized to calculate forearm [Formula: see text] O(2) for more than two decades, the applicability of this experimental design may benefit from a thorough evaluation of its reliability during graded exercise. Therefore, we evaluated the reliability of this technique during incremental handgrip exercise in ten healthy young (24 ± 3(SD) years.) males. [Formula: see text] O(2) and work rate (WR) exhibited a linear relationship (1.0 W: 43.8 ± 10.1 mL·min(−1); 1.5 W: 53.8 ± 14.1 mL·min(−1); 2.0 W: 63.4 ± 16.3 mL·min(−1); 2.5 W: 72.2 ± 17.6 mL·min(−1); 3.0 W: 79.2 ± 18.6 mL·min(−1); r = 0.65, P < 0.01). In turn, [Formula: see text] O(2) was strongly associated with [Formula: see text] (1.0 W: 359 ± 86 mL·min(−1); 1.5 W: 431 ± 112 mL·min(−1); 2.0 W: 490 ± 123 mL·min(−1); 2.5 W: 556 ± 112 mL·min(−1); 3.0 W: 622 ± 131 mL·min(−1); r = 0.96; P < 0.01), whereas arteriovenous oxygen difference (a‐vO(2diff)) remained constant following all WRs (123 ± 11–130 ± 10 mL·L(−1)). Average [Formula: see text] O(2) test–retest difference was −0.4 mL·min(−1) with ±2SD limits of agreement (LOA) of 8.4 and −9.2 mL·min(−1), respectively, whereas coefficients of variation (CVs) ranged from 4–7%. Accordingly, test–retest [Formula: see text] difference was 11.9 mL·min(−1) (LOA: 84.1 mL·min(−1); −60.4 mL·min(−1)) with CVs between 4 and 7%. Test–retest difference for a‐vO (2diff) was −0.28 mL·dL(−1) (LOA: 1.26mL·dL (−1); −1.82 mL·dL(−1)) with 3–5% CVs. In conclusion, our results revealed that forearm [Formula: see text] O(2) determination by Doppler ultrasound and direct venous sampling is linearly related to WR, and a reliable experimental design across a range of exercise intensities. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5974736 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59747362018-06-05 Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas Nyberg, Stian K. Berg, Ole Kristian Helgerud, Jan Wang, Eivind Physiol Rep Original Research Assessment of forearm oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text] O(2)) during handgrip exercise is a keenly investigated concept for observing small muscle mass metabolism. Although a combination of Doppler ultrasound measurements of brachial artery blood flow ([Formula: see text]) and blood gas drawn from a deep forearm vein has been utilized to calculate forearm [Formula: see text] O(2) for more than two decades, the applicability of this experimental design may benefit from a thorough evaluation of its reliability during graded exercise. Therefore, we evaluated the reliability of this technique during incremental handgrip exercise in ten healthy young (24 ± 3(SD) years.) males. [Formula: see text] O(2) and work rate (WR) exhibited a linear relationship (1.0 W: 43.8 ± 10.1 mL·min(−1); 1.5 W: 53.8 ± 14.1 mL·min(−1); 2.0 W: 63.4 ± 16.3 mL·min(−1); 2.5 W: 72.2 ± 17.6 mL·min(−1); 3.0 W: 79.2 ± 18.6 mL·min(−1); r = 0.65, P < 0.01). In turn, [Formula: see text] O(2) was strongly associated with [Formula: see text] (1.0 W: 359 ± 86 mL·min(−1); 1.5 W: 431 ± 112 mL·min(−1); 2.0 W: 490 ± 123 mL·min(−1); 2.5 W: 556 ± 112 mL·min(−1); 3.0 W: 622 ± 131 mL·min(−1); r = 0.96; P < 0.01), whereas arteriovenous oxygen difference (a‐vO(2diff)) remained constant following all WRs (123 ± 11–130 ± 10 mL·L(−1)). Average [Formula: see text] O(2) test–retest difference was −0.4 mL·min(−1) with ±2SD limits of agreement (LOA) of 8.4 and −9.2 mL·min(−1), respectively, whereas coefficients of variation (CVs) ranged from 4–7%. Accordingly, test–retest [Formula: see text] difference was 11.9 mL·min(−1) (LOA: 84.1 mL·min(−1); −60.4 mL·min(−1)) with CVs between 4 and 7%. Test–retest difference for a‐vO (2diff) was −0.28 mL·dL(−1) (LOA: 1.26mL·dL (−1); −1.82 mL·dL(−1)) with 3–5% CVs. In conclusion, our results revealed that forearm [Formula: see text] O(2) determination by Doppler ultrasound and direct venous sampling is linearly related to WR, and a reliable experimental design across a range of exercise intensities. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5974736/ /pubmed/29845765 http://dx.doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13696 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Physiological Reports published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The Physiological Society and the American Physiological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Nyberg, Stian K. Berg, Ole Kristian Helgerud, Jan Wang, Eivind Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas |
title | Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas |
title_full | Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas |
title_fullStr | Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas |
title_full_unstemmed | Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas |
title_short | Reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas |
title_sort | reliability of forearm oxygen uptake during handgrip exercise: assessment by ultrasonography and venous blood gas |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5974736/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29845765 http://dx.doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13696 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nybergstiank reliabilityofforearmoxygenuptakeduringhandgripexerciseassessmentbyultrasonographyandvenousbloodgas AT bergolekristian reliabilityofforearmoxygenuptakeduringhandgripexerciseassessmentbyultrasonographyandvenousbloodgas AT helgerudjan reliabilityofforearmoxygenuptakeduringhandgripexerciseassessmentbyultrasonographyandvenousbloodgas AT wangeivind reliabilityofforearmoxygenuptakeduringhandgripexerciseassessmentbyultrasonographyandvenousbloodgas |