| Literature DB >> 32306967 |
Yves Jammes1,2, Nabil Adjriou1, Nathalie Kipson1, Christine Criado1, Caroline Charpin2, Stanislas Rebaudet2, Chloé Stavris2, Régis Guieu1, Emmanuel Fenouillet1,3, Frédérique Retornaz4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), altered membrane excitability often occurs in exercising muscles demonstrating muscle dysfunction regardless of any psychiatric disorder. Increased oxidative stress is also present in many ME/CFS patients and could affect the membrane excitability of resting muscles.Entities:
Keywords: Muscle excitability; Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome; Oxidative stress; Potassium outflow
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32306967 PMCID: PMC7168976 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-020-02341-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Characteristics of the study population
| Group 1 (N = 39) | Group 2 (N = 33) | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 43 ± 3 | 47 ± 2 |
| Weight (kg) | 64 ± 2 | 68 ± 2 |
| Sex ratio (F/M) | 28/11 | 17/16 |
| Onset of fatigue (months) | 78 ± 19 | 69 ± 14 |
| TBARS rest (nmol/ml) | 1.36 ± 0.03 | 1.01 ± 0.05 |
| ORP (mV) | 165 ± 5 | 127 ± 4*** |
| VO2max (mlO2/min/kg) | 19 ± 1 | 19 ± 1 |
| VO2max (% predicted) | 67 ± 3 | 63 ± 3 |
| Maximal work rate (W) | 124 ± 5 | 118 ± 7 |
| Maximal work rate (% predicted) | 90 ± 3 | 83 ± 3 |
| HR max (bpm) | 151 ± 3 | 148 ± 3 |
| Delta K+ max (mmol/l) | 0.42 ± 0.07 | 0.65 ± 0.07 |
| Handgrip strength (N | 278 ± 22 | 315 ± 33 |
| Handgrip strength (% predicted) | 62 ± 7 | 71 ± 7 |
Group 1 had marked changes in M-wave amplitude and duration whereas no M-wave changes were measured in group 2. All values shown are mean ± standard deviation
TBARS thiobarbituric acid reactive substance, ORP oxidation reduction potential, VO oxygen uptake, HR heart rate
Maximal increase in plasma potassium (K+) concentration was measured at the end of exercise. Asterisks denote significant intergroup difference (**p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001)
M-wave characteristics
| Group 1 (N = 39) | Group 2 (N = 33) | |
|---|---|---|
| Rectus femoris | ||
| Delta M wave amplitude (%) | − 41 ± 4† | + 14 ± 3*** |
| Delta M wave duration (%) | + 18 ± 3# | + 2 ± 3*** |
| Delta M wave latency (ms) | + 2.65 ± 0.17 | + 0.07 ± 0.04*** |
| Flexor digitorum longus | ||
| Delta M wave amplitude (%) | − 65 ± 4† | + 22 ± 5***,# |
| Delta M wave duration (%) | + ± 4 | + 8 ± 2 |
| Delta M wave latency (ms) | + 0.26 ± 0.07 | + 0.04 ± 0.05** |
Maximal variations in M-wave amplitude and duration expressed as a percentage of resting values. Latencies measured at rest and at the end of the post-exercise recovery period. Symbols indicate that the changes in each group differ significantly from control values (i.e. rest data) (#p < 0.01; †p < 0.001). Asterisks denote significant intergroup differences (***p < 0.001). Post-exercise variations in M-wave latencies are not significant
Fig. 1Time course of changes in M-wave amplitude and duration during exercise (rectus femoris) and at rest (flexor digitorum longus) in group 1 patients. Median values are given at rest, at the four steps of exercise, and at the 2nd, 5th, and 10th min of post-exercise recovery. Asterisks (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001) indicate significant decreases in M-wave amplitude and increased duration
Fig. 2Time course of changes in M-wave amplitude and duration during exercise (rectus femoris) and at rest (flexor digitorum longus) in group 2 patients. Median values are given at rest, at the four steps of exercise, and at the 2nd, 5th, and 10th min of post-exercise recovery. Asterisks (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01) indicate significant increases in M-wave amplitude
Fig. 3Regression with 95% CIs obtained between resting TBARS and ORP values. The regression equation and significance against zero of the R coefficient value is indicated
Fig. 4Maximal variations in M-wave amplitude expressed as a percentage of resting values plotted against resting levels of TBARS and ORP. Linear regressions with 95% CIs are shown as well as the regression equations and the significance against zero of the R coefficient value