| Literature DB >> 35873410 |
Yuta Otsuka1, Naokazu Miyamoto2, Akitoshi Nagai1, Takayuki Izumo1, Masaaki Nakai1, Masahiro Fukuda3, Takuma Arimitsu4,5, Yosuke Yamada6, Takeshi Hashimoto4.
Abstract
Objective: Aging of skeletal muscle is characterized not only by a decrease of muscle quantity but also by changes in muscle quality, such as an increase in muscle stiffness. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of supplementation with quercetin glycosides (QGs), well-known polyphenolic flavonoids, combined with resistance exercise on muscle quantity and stiffness. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: muscle quality; nutrition and exercise; passive muscle stiffness; shear wave elastography; whole-body lean mass
Year: 2022 PMID: 35873410 PMCID: PMC9298516 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.912217
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
FIGURE 1Flowchart of this study. Of the 185 participants recruited, 54 were randomly allocated to the placebo, low-QG, and high-QG groups. QG, quercetin glycoside.
Participants’ baseline characteristics.
| Placebo | Low-QG | High-QG |
| |
| Age (y) | 59.8 ± 6.1 | 60.7 ± 6.1 | 60.1 ± 7.8 | 0.930 |
| Sex (men/women) | 8/8 | 7/9 | 7/9 | 0.920 |
| Height (cm) | 161.8 ± 6.1 | 161.6 ± 10.4 | 159.5 ± 11.2 | 0.754 |
| Weight (kg) | 57.8 ± 8.4 | 58.5 ± 9.2 | 57.4 ± 12.9 | 0.952 |
| SMI (kg/m2) | 7.0 ± 0.9 | 7.0 ± 1.1 | 7.0 ± 1.1 | 0.993 |
Values are expressed as means ± standard deviation. There was no significant difference among the groups in baseline data (
Effects of the intervention on muscle quantity and stiffness in the PPS analysis.
| Variable | Group | Baseline | 12 weeks | 24 weeks | Change | Change | Two-way ANOVA |
|
| |||||||
| Thigh muscle CSA (cm2) | Placebo | 98.7 ± 17.4 | 102.0 ± 18.5 | 104.2 ± 19.2 | 3.3 ± 2.6 | 5.5 ± 3.6 | 0.915 |
| Low-QG | 102.7 ± 25.4 | 106.2 ± 25.8 | 109.0 ± 28.2 | 3.4 ± 2.4 | 6.3 ± 4.4 | ||
| High-QG | 101.0 ± 25.3 | 105.1 ± 26.9 | 107.3 ± 27.4 | 4.1 ± 2.6 | 6.3 ± 4.5 | ||
| VL muscle CSA (cm2) | Placebo | 17.0 ± 3.6 | 17.6 ± 3.8 | 17.8 ± 3.9 | 0.6 ± 0.7 | 0.9 ± 0.9 | 0.635 |
| Low-QG | 18.3 ± 4.1 | 18.9 ± 4.2 | 19.5 ± 5.0 | 0.6 ± 0.8 | 1.2 ± 1.3 | ||
| High-QG | 17.7 ± 4.6 | 18.1 ± 4.6 | 18.5 ± 4.9 | 0.5 ± 0.7 | 0.8 ± 0.9 | ||
|
| |||||||
| Leg lean mass (kg) | Placebo | 13.2 ± 2.3 | 13.5 ± 2.5 | 13.6 ± 2.7 | 0.3 ± 0.4 | 0.3 ± 0.6 | 0.332 |
| Low-QG | 13.7 ± 3.8 | 14.1 ± 3.9 | 13.9 ± 3.9 | 0.5 ± 0.4 | 0.2 ± 0.4 | ||
| High-QG | 13.1 ± 3.4 | 13.3 ± 3.6 | 13.4 ± 3.5 | 0.2 ± 0.5 | 0.3 ± 0.3 | ||
| Arm lean mass (kg) | Placebo | 4.1 ± 1.1 | 4.2 ± 1.1 | 4.2 ± 1.1 | 0.1 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | 0.489 |
| Low-QG | 4.2 ± 1.4 | 4.2 ± 1.4 | 4.2 ± 1.4 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.2 | ||
| High-QG | 4.1 ± 1.3 | 4.1 ± 1.3 | 4.1 ± 1.2 | 0.1 ± 0.2 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | ||
| Whole-body lean | Placebo | 40.0 ± 6.9 | 40.7 ± 6.9 | 40.8 ± 7.3 | 0.6 ± 0.6 | 0.8 ± 0.9 | 0.904 |
| Low-QG | 40.6 ± 9.9 | 41.4 ± 10.1 | 41.4 ± 10.3 | 0.7 ± 0.7 | 0.8 ± 1.0 | ||
| High-QG | 39.8 ± 9.4 | 40.3 ± 9.4 | 40.6 ± 9.1 | 0.5 ± 0.6 | 0.8 ± 1.0 | ||
|
| |||||||
| SWV with the knee fully extended (m/s) | Placebo | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | 0.452 |
| Low-QG | 1.9 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.2 | 1.9 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.2 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | ||
| High-QG | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.2 | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | 0.0 ± 0.1 | ||
| SWV with the knee flexed at 90° (m/s) | Placebo | 3.0 ± 0.2 | 2.9 ± 0.2 | 2.8 ± 0.2 | –0.1 ± 0.2 | –0.2 ± 0.2 | 0.811 |
| Low-QG | 2.9 ± 0.2 | 2.8 ± 0.3 | 2.7 ± 0.1 | –0.1 ± 0.2 | –0.1 ± 0.2 | ||
| High-QG | 2.9 ± 0.3 | 2.8 ± 0.3 | 2.8 ± 0.2 | –0.2 ± 0.2 | –0.2 ± 0.2 | ||
| SWV with the knee fully flexed (m/s) | Placebo | 4.7 ± 0.6 | 4.6 ± 0.5 | 4.4 ± 0.4 | –0.1 ± 0.3 | –0.3 ± 0.4 | 0.023 |
| Low-QG | 5.0 ± 0.5 | 4.7 ± 0.6 | 4.4 ± 0.4 | –0.4 ± 0.3 | –0.6 ± 0.3 | ||
| High-QG | 5.0 ± 0.8 | 4.8 ± 0.8 | 4.4 ± 0.5 | –0.2 ± 0.5 | –0.6 ± 0.5 | ||
Values are expressed as means ± standard deviation. For the placebo (n = 16), low-QG (n = 16), and high-QG (n = 16) groups on MRI, DXA, and SWE measurements, where one set of SWE measurements in the placebo group at 12 weeks was missing because of no visit, there were no significant differences among the groups at baseline (one-way ANOVA). *p < 0.05 compared with placebo group (Dunnett’s test).
FIGURE 2Relationships between muscle quantity and stiffness during the 24-week intervention in the PPS analysis. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) between VL muscle CSA on MRI and SWV with the knee fully flexed on SWE at baseline (A) and at 24 weeks (B), and the changes during the 24-week intervention (C) in the PPS analysis. VL, vastus lateralis; CSA, cross-sectional area; and SWV, shear wave velocity.