Barbara Tobin1, Guillaume Costalat2, Gillian M C Renshaw3. 1. Hypoxia and Ischemia Research Unit, School of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University Gold Coast Campus, Southport, QLD, 4222, Australia. 2. APERE Laboratory, EA 3300, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France. 3. Hypoxia and Ischemia Research Unit, School of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University Gold Coast Campus, Southport, QLD, 4222, Australia. g.renshaw@griffith.edu.au.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This single-blind, repeated measures study evaluated adaptive and maladaptive responses to continuous and intermittent hypoxic patterns in young adults. METHODS: Changes in haematological profile, stress and cardiac damage were measured in ten healthy young participants during three phases: (1) breathing normoxic air (baseline); (2) breathing normoxic air via a mask (Sham-controls); (3) breathing intermittent hypoxia (IH) via a mask, mean peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) of 85% ~ 70 min of hypoxia. After a 5-month washout period, participants repeated this three-phase protocol with phase, (4) consisting of continuous hypoxia (CH), mean SpO2 = 85%, ~ 70 min of hypoxia. Measures of the red blood cell count (RBCc), haemoglobin concentration ([Hb]), haematocrit (Hct), percentage of reticulocytes (% Retics), secretory immunoglobulin A (S-IgA), cortisol, cardiac troponin T (cTnT) and the erythropoietic stimulation index (calculated OFF-score) were compared across treatments. RESULTS: Despite identical hypoxic durations at the same fixed SpO2, no significant effects were observed in either CH or Sham-CH control, compared to baseline. While IH and Sham-IH controls demonstrated significant increases in: RBCc; [Hb]; Hct; and the erythropoietic stimulation index. Notably, the % Retics decreased significantly in response to IH (-31.9%) or Sham-IH control (-23.6%), highlighting the importance of including Sham-controls. No difference was observed in S-IgA, cortisol or cTnT. CONCLUSION: The IH but not CH pattern significantly increased key adaptive haematological responses, without maladaptive increases in S-IgA, cortisol or cTnT, indicating that the IH hypoxic pattern would be the best method to boost haematological profiles prior to ascent to altitude.
PURPOSE: This single-blind, repeated measures study evaluated adaptive and maladaptive responses to continuous and intermittent hypoxic patterns in young adults. METHODS: Changes in haematological profile, stress and cardiac damage were measured in ten healthy young participants during three phases: (1) breathing normoxic air (baseline); (2) breathing normoxic air via a mask (Sham-controls); (3) breathing intermittent hypoxia (IH) via a mask, mean peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) of 85% ~ 70 min of hypoxia. After a 5-month washout period, participants repeated this three-phase protocol with phase, (4) consisting of continuous hypoxia (CH), mean SpO2 = 85%, ~ 70 min of hypoxia. Measures of the red blood cell count (RBCc), haemoglobin concentration ([Hb]), haematocrit (Hct), percentage of reticulocytes (% Retics), secretory immunoglobulin A (S-IgA), cortisol, cardiac troponin T (cTnT) and the erythropoietic stimulation index (calculated OFF-score) were compared across treatments. RESULTS: Despite identical hypoxic durations at the same fixed SpO2, no significant effects were observed in either CH or Sham-CH control, compared to baseline. While IH and Sham-IH controls demonstrated significant increases in: RBCc; [Hb]; Hct; and the erythropoietic stimulation index. Notably, the % Retics decreased significantly in response to IH (-31.9%) or Sham-IH control (-23.6%), highlighting the importance of including Sham-controls. No difference was observed in S-IgA, cortisol or cTnT. CONCLUSION: The IH but not CH pattern significantly increased key adaptive haematological responses, without maladaptive increases in S-IgA, cortisol or cTnT, indicating that the IH hypoxic pattern would be the best method to boost haematological profiles prior to ascent to altitude.
Authors: Christopher J Gore; Robin Parisotto; Michael J Ashenden; Jim Stray-Gundersen; Ken Sharpe; Will Hopkins; Kerry R Emslie; Chris Howe; Graham J Trout; Rymantas Kazlauskas; Allan G Hahn Journal: Haematologica Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Andrew M Luks; Paul S Auerbach; Luanne Freer; Colin K Grissom; Linda E Keyes; Scott E McIntosh; George W Rodway; Robert B Schoene; Ken Zafren; Peter H Hackett Journal: Wilderness Environ Med Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 1.518
Authors: P O Koistinen; H Rusko; K Irjala; A Rajamäki; K Penttinen; V P Sarparanta; J Karpakka; J Leppäluoto Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Louisa M Lobigs; Ken Sharpe; Laura A Garvican-Lewis; Christopher J Gore; Peter Peeling; Brian Dawson; Yorck O Schumacher Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: Elina Ovchynnikova; Francesca Aglialoro; Marieke von Lindern; Emile van den Akker Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-07-11 Impact factor: 4.566