| Literature DB >> 26042047 |
Matthias Weippert1, Martin Behrens2, Ray Gonschorek2, Sven Bruhn2, Kristin Behrens3.
Abstract
The precise contributions of afferent feedback to cardiovascular and respiratory responses to exercise are still unclear. The aim of this crossover study was to assess whether and how autonomic cardiovascular and respiratory control differed in response to dynamic (DYN) and isometric contractions (ISO) at a similar, low heart rate (HR) level. Therefore, 22 healthy males (26.7 ± 3.6 yrs) performed two kinds of voluntary exercises at similar HR: ISO and DYN of the right quadriceps femoris muscle. Although HR was eqivalent (82 ± 8 bpm for DYN and ISO, respectively), rating of exertion, blood pressures, and rate pressure product were higher, whereas breathing frequency, minute ventilation, oxygen uptake and carbon dioxide output were significantly lower during ISO. Tidal volume, end-tidal partial pressures of O2 and CO2, respiratory exchange ratio and capillary blood lactate concentration were comparable between both contraction modes. Heart rate variability (HRV) indicators, SDNN, HF-Power and LF-Power, representing both vagal and sympathetic influences, were significantly higher during ISO. Sample entropy, a non-linear measure of HRV was also significantly affected by contraction mode. It can be concluded that, despite the same net effect on HR, the quality of cardiovascular control during low intensity exercise is significantly different between DYN and ISO. HRV analysis indicated a sympatho-vagal coactivation during ISO. Whether mechanoreceptor feedback alone, a change in central command, or the interaction of both mechanisms is the main contributor of the distinct autonomic responses to the different exercise modes remains to be elucidated.Entities:
Keywords: afferent feedback; autonomic nervous system; central command; circulation; heart rate variability; isometric exercise
Year: 2015 PMID: 26042047 PMCID: PMC4436571 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2015.00156
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Characteristics of the participants ( = 22).
| Mean | 26.7 | 76.9 | 1.81 | 23.4 |
| SD | 3.6 | 7.2 | 0.06 | 2.2 |
| Range | 21.0–36.0 | 62.9–87.4 | 1.71–1.94 | 19.0–28.5 |
Figure 1Design of the experimental cross-over study ( = 22).
Figure 2Scheme of the experimental setup. Isometric and dynamic exercises were controlled by a CYBEX NORM dynamometer (Computer Sports Medicine® Inc., Stoughton, MA, USA). Heart rate was monitored continuously using a Polar® heart rate monitor (Polar® Inc., Finland). Blood pressure was measured discontinuously during the last minute of each exercise intervention. Respiratory gas analysis was carried out breath-by-breath using the Metamax 3B system (Cortex Biophysics Inc., Germany).
Isometric maximum voluntary torque (iMVT), absolute and relative torques applied during ISO and DYN ( = 22).
| Mean ± SD | 293.1 ± 44.4 | 34.2 ± 7.7 | 3.9 ± 3.2 | 11.8 ± 2.7 | 1.4 ± 1.3 |
| Range | 207.7–384.0 | 24.0–56.1 | 0.1–13.0 | 7.3–20.9 | 0.03–5.0 |
Mean ± SD for baseline and exercise conditions of heart rate, blood pressure, heart rate variability, and subjective effort; -values and effect sizes for comparisons between dynamic (DYN) and static exercise (ISO), ( = 22).
| Heart Rate [bpm] | 68.3 ± 8.0 | 68.4 ± 8.0 | 81.8 ± 7.7 | 82.1 ± 7.6 | 0.492 | −0.153 |
| Lactate conc. [mmol/L] | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 1.3 ± 0.4 | 1.3 ± 0.3 | 0.786 | −0.060 |
| BF [1/min] | 15.2 ± 3.3 | 15.1 ± 3.2 | 21.4 ± 2.9 | 17.4 ± 2.9 | 0.000 | 2.089 |
| VE [L/min] | 9.8 ± 1.4 | 9.7 ± 1.4 | 17.3 ± 2.6 | 13.8 ± 2.6 | 0.000 | 1.281 |
| VO2 [L/min] | 0.30 ± 0.15 | 0.28 ± 0.15 | 0.62 ± 0.31 | 0.47 ± 0.20 | 0.002 | 0.955 |
| VCO2 [L/min] | 0.26 ± 0.12 | 0.24 ± 0.12 | 0.55 ± 0.27 | 0.43 ± 0.19 | 0.001 | 1.034 |
| PET O2 | 108.8 ± 5.0 | 109.6 ± 6.0 | 106.9 ± 5.1 | 108.6 ± 6.7 | 0.182 | −0.340 |
| PET CO2 | 36.9 ± 3.4 | 36.6 ± 4.5 | 39.8 ± 3.7 | 38.4 ± 4.7 | 0.042 | 0.559 |
| Vt [L] | 0.66 ± 0.11 | 0.66 ± 0.12 | 0.82 ± 0.13 | 0.80 ± 0.12 | 0.523 | 0.147 |
| RER | 0.87 ± 0.18 | 0.85 ± 0.24 | 0.89 ± 0.16 | 0.93 ± 0.20 | 0.310 | −0.253 |
| SBP [mmHg] | 126.0 ± 9.3 | 128.1 ± 8.4 | 149.2 ± 10.7 | 156.4 ± 13.1 | 0.019 | −0.545 |
| DBP [mmHg] | 79.8 ± 8.1 | 78.7 ± 7.2 | 80.1 ± 8.8 | 93.8 ± 9.2 | 0.000 | −1.391 |
| MAP [mmHg] | 95.2 ± 7.2 | 95.2 ± 6.1 | 103.1 ± 8.2 | 114.7 ± 9.3 | 0.000 | −1.199 |
| RPP [mmHg/min] | 8644.5 ± 1301.2 | 8754.6 ± 1151.4 | 12150.1 ± 1377.1 | 12787.0 ± 1568.7 | 0.020 | −0.539 |
| R–R interval [ms] | 896.7 ± 100.6 | 894.1 ± 100.8 | 742.2 ± 70.6 | 740.3 ± 68.1 | 0.640 | 0.105 |
| SDNN [ms] | 73.4 ± 28.5 | 68.1 ± 23.4 | 38.9 ± 16.8 | 47.8 ± 20.5 | 0.003 | −0.672 |
| lnHFP [ms2] | 6.6 ± 0.8 | 6.5 ± 0.9 | 5.1 ± 1.2 | 5.7 ± 0.9 | 0.002 | −0.789 |
| lnLFP [ms2] | 7.4 ± 1.0 | 7.3 ± 0.9 | 5.9 ± 0.9 | 6.7 ± 0.8 | 0.000 | −0.987 |
| LF n.u. | 64.2 ± 16.7 | 65.8 ± 13.9 | 66.3 ± 19.7 | 71.3 ± 13.7 | 0.087 | −0.409 |
| SampEn | 1.45 ± 0.30 | 1.44 ± 0.28 | 1.60 ± 0.31 | 1.30 ± 0.23 | 0.000 | 1.034 |
| RPE | 6.5 ± 0.8 | 6.5 ± 0.7 | 12.2 ± 1.3 | 15.1 ± 1.4 | 0.000 | −1.386 |
BF, breathing frequency; VE, minute ventilation; VO2, oxygen uptake; VCO2, carbon dioxide output; PET CO2, partial pressure of end tidal CO2; PET O2, partial pressure of end tidal O2; Vt, tidal volume; RER, respiratory exchange ratio (VCO2/VO2); SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; MAP, mean arterial pressure; RPP, rate pressure product; R–R interval, heartbeat-to-heartbeat interval; SDNN, standard deviation of the R-R intervals of the record; lnHFP, natural log-transformed high frequency power; lnLFP, natural log-transformed low frequency power; LF n.u., LFP in normalized units; SampEn, sample entropy; RPE, perceived exertion rated on a Borg scale from 6 (= minimal) to 20 (= maximal exhaustion); N = 22.