Cargando…

Effects of electrical muscle stimulation on cerebral blood flow

BACKGROUND: Electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) induces involuntary muscle contraction. Several studies have suggested that EMS has the potential to be an alternative method of voluntary exercise; however, its effects on cerebral blood flow (CBF) when applied to large lower limb muscles are poorly u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ando, Soichi, Takagi, Yoko, Watanabe, Hikaru, Mochizuki, Kodai, Sudo, Mizuki, Fujibayashi, Mami, Tsurugano, Shinobu, Sato, Kohei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34775960
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12868-021-00670-z
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) induces involuntary muscle contraction. Several studies have suggested that EMS has the potential to be an alternative method of voluntary exercise; however, its effects on cerebral blood flow (CBF) when applied to large lower limb muscles are poorly understood. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of EMS on CBF, focusing on whether the effects differ between the internal carotid (ICA) and vertebral (VA) arteries. METHODS: The participants performed the experiments under EMS and control (rest) conditions in a randomized crossover design. The ICA and VA blood flow were measured before and during EMS or control. Heart rate, blood pressure, minute ventilation, oxygen uptake, and end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (P(ET)CO(2)) were monitored and measured as well. RESULTS: The ICA blood flow increased during EMS [Pre: 330 ± 69 mL min(−1); EMS: 371 ± 81 mL min(−1), P = 0.001, effect size (Cohen’s d) = 0.55]. In contrast, the VA blood flow did not change during EMS (Pre: 125 ± 47 mL min(−1); EMS: 130 ± 45 mL min(−1), P = 0.26, effect size = 0.12). In the EMS condition, there was a significant positive linear correlation between ΔP(ET)CO(2) and ΔICA blood flow (R = 0.74, P = 0.02). No relationships were observed between ΔP(ET)CO(2) and ΔVA blood flow (linear: R = − 0.17, P = 0.66; quadratic: R = 0.43, P = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: The present results indicate that EMS increased ICA blood flow but not VA blood flow, suggesting that the effects of EMS on cerebral perfusion differ between anterior and posterior cerebral circulation, primarily due to the differences in cerebrovascular response to CO(2).