| Literature DB >> 33644467 |
Grazielle S De Oliveira1, Gislaine S Pinheiro1, Isabel C T Proença2,3, Amanda Blembeel2, Marcela Z Casal4, Daniela Pochmann2, Leonardo Tartaruga4, Flavia G Martinez4, Alex Sander Araújo3, Viviane Elsner1,2,3, Caroline Dani1,2.
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder with significant motor disabilities and cognitive decline. Importantly, the imbalance of oxidative stress is related to PD physiopathology and progression. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of grape juice consumption associated with an aquatic exercise protocol on oxidative stress parameters and cognitive function in individuals with PD. The participants were randomized into two groups: grape juice group (GJG) and control group (CG) and were submitted to 4 weeks of an aquatic intervention (twice a week, approximately 60 minutes/session). The GJG also consumed 400 ml of grape juice per day (integral and conventional) during this period. Cognitive function was assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCa) questionnaire. For the analysis of oxidative stress markers, specifically lipid oxidative damage (TBARS), proteins (Carbonil), acid uric and the activity of antioxidant enzymes (superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase and catalase), blood collection were done before and after intervention. No changes were observed in cognitive function after intervention in both groups. Regarding biomarkers, a reduction of antioxidant enzymes, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and uric acid was observed in both groups. However, only the GJG showed a significant reduction on protein oxidation levels after intervention. In conclusion, the consumption of grape juice associated with an aquatic exercise protocol might be consider an effective alternative to reduce the oxidative damage in PD, reinforcing the importance of this intervention in promoting beneficial impact in this population.Entities:
Keywords: Aquatic exercise; Cognition; Grape juice; Oxidative stress
Year: 2021 PMID: 33644467 PMCID: PMC7887390 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06185
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Figure 1Consort flow diagram.
Total phenolic, total flavonoids, and quantification of main anthocyanidins were analyzed in the grape juice.
| Phenolic compounds | Values (MED±SD) |
|---|---|
| Total phenolic compounds (mg | 2.187 ± 13.85 |
| Total flavonoids compounds (mg | 388.66 ± 1.52 |
| Phenolic compounds identification (mg/L) | |
| Gallic acid | 24.6 ± 0.2 |
| Epigallocatechin | 0.2 ± 0.01 |
| Catechin | 0.4 ± 0.01 |
| Epicatechin | 1.76 ± 0.05 |
| Epigallocatechin gallate | 1.80 ± 0.01 |
| Hesperidin | 2.53 ± 0.05 |
| Ferulic acid | 11.73 ± 0.15 |
| Naringin | 0.33 ± 0.05 |
| Resveratrol | 1.9 ± 0.01 |
MED – median; SD: standard deviation.
Participants' characteristics and Anthropometric parameters in PD patients before and after aquatic exercise with or without grape juice.
| ACQ-EXE (n = 09) | ACQ-EXE + GJ (n = 10) | p | P group | P time | P interaction | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (female/male) | 1(11.1%)/8(88.9%) | 1 (10%)/9 (90%) | 0.937 | ||||
| Age (years) | 65.5 ± 2.16 | 68.33 ± 0.413 | 0.551 | ||||
| Body mass (kg) | Before | 81.71 ± 3.72 | 76.97 ± 3.21 | 0.328 | 0.874 | 0.927 | |
| After | 81.68 ± 3.71 | 76.90 ± 3.17 | |||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | Before | 27.07 ± 0.88 | 25.70 ± 1.34 | 0.386 | 0.820 | 0.854 | |
| After | 27.06 ± 0.06 | 25.60 ± 1.28 | |||||
| WC (cm) | Before | 100.11 ± 3.25 | 98.66 ± 2.27 | 0.822 | 0.341 | 0.942 | |
| After | 99.44 ± 2.77 | 97.37 ± 2.53 | |||||
| HC (cm) | Before | 103.00 ± 1.58 | 100.20 ± 1.98 | 0.625 | 0.672 | 0.092 | |
| After | 100.94 ± 2.01 | 101.43 ± 2.65 | |||||
| CC (cm) | Before | 37.66 ± 0.89 | 35.11 ± 0.96 | 0.058 | 0.278 | 0.403 | |
| After | 37.60 ± 0.99 | 34.71 ± 1.20 | |||||
BMI: Body mass index. WC: waist circumference. HC: Hip circumference; CC: Calf circumference. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (numeric data) or relative frequency (categorical data). The comparison between groups was performed using the Student t-test for independent data or chi-square test (p < 0.05). Comparison between before and after, considering the groups, were analyzed by GEE, with Sidak's post-test.
Cognition evaluation through the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at PD submitted to an aquatic exercise program with or without grape juice.
| Parameter | Before Mean ± SE | After Mean ± SE | % | Effect factor | (p-value) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Time | Interaction | ||||
| ACQ-EX | 25.11 ± 0.65 | 23.12 ± 2.21 | -7.92% | 0.32 | 0.61 | 0.23 |
| ACQ-EX + GJ | 25.22 ± 0.95 | 26.11 ± 1.08 | 3.52% |
ACQ-EX: aquatic exercise; GJ: grape juice; SD: standard deviation; Avg: average. ∗ Indicates a significant difference (p < 0.05) concerning pre and post times; Comparison, according to GEE, p < 0.05 was considered as a significant value. Difference: negative values indicate a decrease in the post-; positive values indicate an increase in post-.
Indicators of oxidative damage and antioxidant enzymes activity pre and post-match simulation submitted to Aquatic exercise (ACQ-EX), with or without grape juice (GJ).
| Parameters | Before Mean ± SE | After Mean ± SE | Effect factor | (p-valor) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Time | Interaction | |||
| ACQ-EX | 0.90 ± 0.31 | 0.30 ± 0.07 | 0.78 | 0.000∗ | 0.375 |
| ACQ-EX + GJ | 0.70 ± 0.27 | 0.33 ± 0.04 | |||
| ACQ-EX | 43.68 ± 6.48 | 59.08 ± 3.73∗ | 0.245 | 0.116 | 0.000 |
| ACQ-EX + GJ | 63.08 ± 5.83 | 55.91 ± 5.03∗ | |||
| ACQ-EX | 55.08 ± 6.09 | 11.85 ± 1.78∗ | 0.92 | 0.00∗ | 0.000 |
| ACQ-EX + GJ | 51.03 ± 4.61 | 12.51 ± 2.11∗ | |||
| ACQ-EX | 119.69 ± 15.11 | 46.30 ± 6.52∗ | 0.17 | 0.00∗ | 0.000 |
| ACQ-EX + GJ | 173.81 ± 31.70 | 49.64 ± 6.31∗ | |||
| ACQ-EX | 14.63 ± 0.77 | 5.98 ± 0.99∗ | 0.26 | 0.00∗ | 0.000 |
| ACQ-EX + GJ | 13.66 ± 1.67 | 9.70 ± 2.89∗ | |||
ACQ-EX: aquatic exercise; GJ: grape juice; SE: standard error. ∗ Indicates a significant difference (p < 0.05) about pre and post times; Comparison, according to GEE, p < 0.05 was considered as a significant value.
Figure 2Effects of an aquatic exercise program with or without grape juice consumption on indicators oxidative stress (A and B) and antioxidant enzyme activities (C, D e E). Data are expressed as mean ± SE. ∗ indicates significant difference (p < 0.05) between pre and post times; the differences were evaluated by t-test).
Figure 3Effects of an aquatic exercise program with or without grape juice consumption on uric acid, before and after (A), and the difference (before and after) (B). Data are expressed as mean ± SE. ∗ indicates significant difference (p < 0.05) between pre and post times; the differences were evaluated by t-test).
Correlations between the parameters.
| Parameters | R | p |
|---|---|---|
| Before intervention for both group | ||
| TBARS x Carbonyl | 0.574 | 0.025∗ |
| CAT x MoCA | 0.543 | 0.037∗ |
| After intervention for both groups | ||
| Carbonyl x GPx | 0.635 | 0.015∗ |
| After intervention for ACQ-EXE group | ||
| Carbonyl x CAT | 0.714 | 0.047∗ |
| Carbonyl x GPx | 0.714 | 0.047∗ |
| TBARS x SOD | 0.811 | 0.027∗ |
| TBARS x GPX | 0.404 | 0.033∗ |
| After intervention for ACQ-EXE + GJ group | ||
| Carbonyl x CAT | 0.829 | 0.042∗ |
| Uric Acid x MoCA | -0.975 | 0.005∗ |
∗p < 0.05 according to the Spearman correlation test. TBARS: reactive substances to thiobarbituric acid. CAT: catalase activity; SOD: superoxide dismutase activity. GPX: glutathione peroxidase activity. MoCA: Montreal Cognitive Assessment.
Figure 4Principal results from two different treatments, aquatic exercise with or without grape juice, in cognition and oxidative stress markers.