| Literature DB >> 28503537 |
Daniele Jardim Feriani1,2, Hélio José Coelho1, Kátia Bilhar Scapini3, Oscar Albuquerque de Moraes3, Cristiano Mostarda4, Olivia Moraes Ruberti1, Marco Carlos Uchida1, Érico Chagas Caperuto2, Maria Cláudia Irigoyen3, Bruno Rodrigues1.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of inspiratory muscle exercise (IME) on metabolic and hemodynamic parameters, cardiac autonomic modulation and respiratory function of older women with metabolic syndrome (MS). For this, sixteen older women with MS and 12 aged-matched controls participated of the present study. Two days before and 2 days after the main experiment, fasting blood samples (i.e., total cholesterol, triglycerides and blood glucose), cardiac autonomic modulation (i.e., heart rate variability), and respiratory muscle function were obtained and evaluated. The sessions of physical exercise was based on a IME, which was performed during 7 days. Each session of IME was performed during 20 min, at 30% of maximal static inspiratory pressure. In the results, MS group presented higher levels of triglycerides, blood glucose, and systolic blood pressure when compared to control group. IME was not able to change these variables. However, although MS group showed impaired respiratory muscle strength and function, as well as cardiac autonomic modulation, IME was able to improve these parameters. Thus, the data showed that seven days of IME are capable to improve respiratory function and cardiac autonomic modulation of older women with MS. These results indicate that IME can be a profitable therapy to counteracting the clinical markers of MS, once repeated sessions of acute IME can cause chronical alterations on respiratory function and cardiac autonomic modulation.Entities:
Keywords: Autonomic nervous system; Breathing exercises; Elderly; Metabolic syndrome; Respiratory function
Year: 2017 PMID: 28503537 PMCID: PMC5412498 DOI: 10.12965/jer.1734896.448
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exerc Rehabil ISSN: 2288-176X
Fig. 1An illustration of the study design. MS, metabolic syndrome.
Participant characteristics
| Characteristic | Control (n=12) | MS (n=16) |
|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 68±3 | 69±4 |
|
| ||
| Time after menopause (yr) | 10±3 | 12±4 |
|
| ||
| MS diagnosis (yr) | - | 10±5 |
|
| ||
| Weight (kg) | 75.3±12 | 78.5±10 |
|
| ||
| Height (cm) | 155±15 | 153±12 |
|
| ||
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 32.6±5 | 34.5±6 |
|
| ||
| Waist-hip ratio | 0.82±0.06 | 0.93±0.07 |
|
| ||
| Medications (%) | ||
| ACE inhibitor | 9 | 25 |
| HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor | 5 | 78 |
| Diuretic | 18 | 60 |
| Acid acetylsalicylic | 8 | 38 |
| ARBs | 0 | 45 |
| Oral hypoglycemiants | 0 | 95 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation unless otherwise indicated.
MS, metabolic syndrome; ACE, angiotensin-converting-enzyme; HMG-CoA, 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl coenzyme A; ARBs, angiotensin II receptor blockers.
P<0.05 vs. C group.
Metabolic and hemodynamic effects of IME in control and MS groups
| Parameter | Control | MS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Baseline | After IME | ES | Baseline | After IME | ES | |
| Metabolic | ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Total cholesterol (mg/dL) | 180±20 | 178±25 | 0.08 | 191±22 | 188±22 | 0.13 |
|
| ||||||
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 98±15 | 95±12 | 0.22 | 201±25 | 205±18 | −0.18 |
|
| ||||||
| Fasting BG (mg/dL) | 95±5 | 98±7 | −0.49 | 122±9 | 126±10 | −0.42 |
|
| ||||||
| Hemodynamic | ||||||
| Systolic BP (mmHg) | 119±10 | 117±15 | 0.15 | 132±13 | 129±10 | 0.25 |
| Diastolic BP (mmHg) | 74±8 | 77±6 | 0.42 | 80±9 | 82±13 | −0.17 |
| Heart rate (bpm) | 77±8 | 80±10 | 0.33 | 83±9 | 79±12 | 0.37 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
IME, inspiratory muscle exercise; MS, metabolic syndrome; ES, effect size; BG, blood glucose; BP, blood pressure.
P<0.05 vs. control group at the same evaluation time.
Respiratory effects of IME in control and MS groups
| Parameter | Control | MS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Baseline | After IME | ES | Baseline | After IME | ES | |
| Pressures | ||||||
| MIP (cmH2O) | 102.7±25 | 118.3±15 | −0.77 | 69.0±14 | 94.8±11 | −1.98 |
| % Predict | 129.1±25 | 155.3±10 | −1.36 | 93.1±15 | 121.7±9 | −2.26 |
| MEP (cmH2O) | 102.2±19 | 110.4±14 | −0.47 | 78.7±20 | 86.7±15 | −0.45 |
| % Predict | 144.3±15 | 149.5±16 | −0.32 | 112.8±14 | 122.3±12 | −0.76 |
|
| ||||||
| Pulmonary function | ||||||
| FVC (L) | 3.65±0.3 | 3.90±0.5 | −0.60 | 2.93±0.2 | 3.28±0.6 | −0.78 |
| FEV1 (L) | 2.74±0.1 | 2.84±0.4 | −0.34 | 2.46±0.1 | 2.58±0.2 | −0.75 |
| FEV1/FVC (%) | 76.7±4 | 80.1±8 | −0.63 | 73.2±5 | 78.9±4 | −1.10 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
IME, inspiratory muscle exercise; MS, metabolic syndrome; ES, effect size; MIP, maximal inspiratory pressure; MEP, maximal expiratory pressure; FVC, forced vital capacity; FEV1, forced expiratory volume in 1 second; FVC/FEV1, ratio of FEV1 to FVC.
P<0.05 vs. control group at the same evaluation time.
P<0.05 vs. baseline in control group.
P<0.05 vs. baseline MS group.
Heart rate variability in time domain in control and MS groups
| Parameter | Control | MS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Baseline | After IME | ES | Baseline | After IME | ES | |
| SDNN | 23.2±11 | 35.3±6 | −1.35 | 12.1±5 | 19.7±4 | −1.54 |
|
| ||||||
| RMSSD | 20.3±5 | 31.1±4 | −2.42 | 13.3±7 | 19.5±3 | −1.11 |
|
| ||||||
| pNN50 | 3.4±0.9 | 3.9±1.1 | - | 2.2±0.7 | 3.1±1.5‡ | −0.76 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
IME, inspiratory muscle exercise; MS, metabolic syndrome; ES, effect size; SDNN, standard deviation of the RR interval (time elapsing between two consecutive R waves); RMSSD, root-meansquare of differences of successive RR interval; pNN50, percent of differences of adjacent RR interval >50 msec.
P<0.05 vs. control group at the same evaluation time.
P<0.05 vs. baseline MS group.
Fig. 2Heart rate variability in frequency domain in control and metabolic syndrome (MS) groups. (A) Absolute low frequency band. (B) Percent low frequency band. (C) Absolute high frequency band. (D) Percent high frequency band. (E) LF/HF ratio. HF, high frequency band; LF, low frequency band. *P<0.05 vs. control group at the same evaluation time. †P<0.05 vs. baseline in control group. ‡P<0.05 vs. baseline MS group.