| Literature DB >> 35276922 |
Emily E Howard1,2,3, Lee M Margolis2, Maya A Fussell1, Clifford G Rios4, Eric M Meisterling5, Christopher J Lena4, Stefan M Pasiakos6, Nancy R Rodriguez1.
Abstract
Increasing dietary protein intake during periods of muscle disuse may mitigate the resulting decline in muscle protein synthesis (MPS). The purpose of this randomized pilot study was to determine the effect of increased protein intake during periods of disuse before anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction on myofibrillar protein synthesis (MyoPS), and proteolytic and myogenic gene expression. Six healthy, young males (30 ± 9 y) were randomized to consume a high-quality, optimal protein diet (OP; 1.9 g·kg-1·d-1) or adequate protein diet (AP; 1.2 g·kg-1·d-1) for two weeks before ACL reconstruction. Muscle biopsies collected during surgery were used to measure integrated MyoPS during the intervention (via daily deuterium oxide ingestion) and gene expression at the time of surgery. MyoPS tended to be higher, with a large effect size in OP compared to AP (0.71 ± 0.1 and 0.54 ± 0.1%·d-1; p = 0.076; g = 1.56). Markers of proteolysis and myogenesis were not different between groups (p > 0.05); however, participants with greater MyoPS exhibited lower levels of MuRF1 gene expression compared to those with lower MyoPS (r = -0.82, p = 0.047). The data from this pilot study reveal a potential stimulatory effect of increased daily protein intake on MyoPS during injury-mediated disuse conditions that warrants further investigation.Entities:
Keywords: anabolic resistance; disuse atrophy; muscle protein synthesis; musculoskeletal injury
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35276922 PMCID: PMC8840691 DOI: 10.3390/nu14030563
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Participant Characteristics 1.
| AP | OP | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (y) | 32 ± 11 | 30 ± 7 | 0.78 |
| Height (m) | 1.8 ± 0.1 | 1.8 ± 0.1 | 0.75 |
| Weight (kg) | 85.3 ± 8.2 | 76.2 ± 14.5 | 0.45 |
| Body mass index | 26.2 ± 1.6 | 23.9 ± 2.2 | 0.25 |
1 Values are the mean ± SD. Differences between AP (n = 3) and OP (n = 3) were examined using unpaired t tests and were not different between groups. AP, adequate protein; OP, optimal protein.
Preoperative Dietary Intake 1.
| AP | OP | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy (kcal/d) | 2367 ± 125 | 2853 ± 382 | 0.10 |
| Carbohydrate (g·kg−1·d−1) | 3.7 ± 0.6 | 4.3 ± 1.8 | 0.60 |
| Fat (g·kg−1·d−1) | 1.0 ± 0.l | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 0.06 |
| Protein (g·kg−1·d−1) | 1.2 ± 0.0 | 1.9 ± 0.2 | 0.01 |
| Leucine (mg·kg−1·d−1) | 73 ± 10 | 104 ± 14 | 0.04 |
| Isoleucine (mg·kg−1·d−1) | 42 ± 7 | 58 ± 8 | 0.06 |
| Valine (mg·kg−1·d−1) | 48 ± 7 | 68 ± 9 | 0.04 |
| Total BCAAs (mg·kg−1·d−1) | 162 ± 24 | 230 ± 32 | 0.04 |
1 Values are the mean ± SD. Differences between AP (n = 3) and OP (n = 3) were examined using unpaired t tests AP, adequate protein; BCAA, branched chain amino acids; OP, optimal protein.
Figure 1Myofibrillar FSR (%·d−1) over a two week period before ACL reconstruction with AP (1.2 g·kg−1·d−1) and OP (1.9 g·kg−1·d−1). Differences between AP (n = 3) and OP (n = 3) were examined using unpaired t tests. Values are the mean ± SD. AP, adequate protein; FSR, fractional synthesis rate; OP, optimal protein.
Myogenic and proteolytic gene expression 1.
| AP | OP | Effect Size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Myogenesis | ||||
| MyoD | 1.00 ± 0.11 | 1.53 ± 0.94 | 0.39 | 0.63 |
| Myogenin | 1.03 ± 0.31 | 1.12 ± 0.23 | 0.72 | 0.25 |
| Pax7 | 1.20 ± 0.92 | 0.79 ± 0.16 | 0.48 | 0.51 |
| Myf5 | 1.17 ± 0.85 | 0.89 ± 0.14 | 0.60 | 0.35 |
| Myf6 | 1.10 ± 0.52 | 0.96 ± 0.43 | 0.74 | 0.24 |
| Proteolysis | ||||
| MAFbx | 1.10 ± 0.50 | 0.94 ± 0.24 | 0.66 | 0.31 |
| MuRF1 | 1.04 ± 0.34 | 0.66 ± 0.23 | 0.18 | 1.05 |
1 Values are the mean ± SD. Differences between AP (n = 3; n = 2 for Myf5) and OP (n = 3) were examined using unpaired t tests. AP, adequate protein; MAFbx, muscle atrophy F-box; MuRF1, muscle RING finger−1; Myf5, myogenic factor 5; Myf6, myogenic factor 6; OP, optimal protein; Pax7, paired box 7.
Figure 2Relationship between myofibrillar FSR (%·d−1) and MuRF1 gene expression in AP and OP. Associations were examined using Pearson’s correlation. AP, adequate protein; FSR, fractional synthesis rate; OP, optimal protein.