Cargando…
Running vs. resistance exercise to counteract deconditioning induced by 90-day head-down bedrest
Spaceflight is associated with enhanced inactivity, resulting in muscular and cardiovascular deconditioning. Although physical exercise is commonly used as a countermeasure, separate applications of running and resistive exercise modalities have never been directly compared during long-term bedrest....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9473647/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36117704 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.902983 |
Sumario: | Spaceflight is associated with enhanced inactivity, resulting in muscular and cardiovascular deconditioning. Although physical exercise is commonly used as a countermeasure, separate applications of running and resistive exercise modalities have never been directly compared during long-term bedrest. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of two exercise countermeasure programs, running and resistance training, applied separately, for counteracting cardiovascular deconditioning induced by 90-day head-down bedrest (HDBR). Maximal oxygen uptake ( [Formula: see text] O(2)max), orthostatic tolerance, continuous ECG and blood pressure (BP), body composition, and leg circumferences were measured in the control group (CON: n = 8), running exercise group (RUN: n = 7), and resistive exercise group (RES: n = 7). After HDBR, the decrease in [Formula: see text] O(2)max was prevented by RUN countermeasure and limited by RES countermeasure (−26% in CON p < 0.05, −15% in RES p < 0.05, and −4% in RUN ns). Subjects demonstrated surprisingly modest orthostatic tolerance decrease for different groups, including controls. Lean mass loss was limited by RES and RUN protocols (−10% in CON vs. −5% to 6% in RES and RUN). Both countermeasures prevented the loss in thigh circumference (−7% in CON p < 0.05, −2% in RES ns, and −0.6% in RUN ns) and limited loss in calf circumference (−10% in CON vs. −7% in RES vs. −5% in RUN). Day–night variations in systolic BP were preserved during HDBR. Decrease in [Formula: see text] O(2)max positively correlated with decrease in thigh (r = 0.54 and p = 0.009) and calf (r = 0.52 and p = 0.012) circumferences. During this 90-day strict HDBR, running exercise successfully preserved [Formula: see text] O(2)max, and resistance exercise limited its decline. Both countermeasures limited loss in global lean mass and leg circumferences. The [Formula: see text] O(2)max reduction seems to be conditioned more by muscular than by cardiovascular parameters. |
---|