M S Nash1, B M Montalvo, B Applegate. 1. Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Miami School of Medicine, FL, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test whether lower extremity blood flow and hyperemic responses to vascular occlusion differ among electrically stimulated exercise trained and sedentary tetraplegic persons and subjects without tetraplegia (control). DESIGN: Blinded cross-sectional comparison, control group. SETTING: Academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Ten sedentary tetraplegic men, 10 tetraplegic persons previously habituated to electrically stimulated cycling exercise for 0.4 to 7 years, and 10 nondisabled controls. OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects underwent quantitative Doppler ultrasound examination of the common femoral artery (CFA). End-diastolic arterial images and arterial flow-velocity profiles obtained at rest and following five minutes of suprasystolic thigh occlusion were computer digitized for analysis of heart rate (HR), CFA peak systolic velocity (PSV), CFA cross-sectional area (CSA), flow velocity integral (FVI), and computed CFA inflow volume (IV). RESULTS: No group main effects were observed for resting HR or FVI. At rest, trained tetraplegic men had 14.9% greater PSV, 29.8% larger CSA, and 51.3% greater IV (p values < .05) than sedentary tetraplegic subjects. Resting PSV and IV of the trained subjects did not differ from controls, although CSA was smaller than controls (p < .05). Following occlusion, PSV, CSA, and IV averaged 16.5%, 33.4%, and 65.1% greater for trained tetraplegics persons, respectively, than sedentary tetraplegic subjects (p values < .05). Only CSA differed between the control and the trained groups (p < .05). CONCLUSION: Tetraplegic persons conditioned by electrically stimulated cycling have greater lower extremity blood flow and hyperemic responses to occlusion than do their sedentary counterparts.
OBJECTIVE: To test whether lower extremity blood flow and hyperemic responses to vascular occlusion differ among electrically stimulated exercise trained and sedentary tetraplegic persons and subjects without tetraplegia (control). DESIGN: Blinded cross-sectional comparison, control group. SETTING: Academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Ten sedentary tetraplegic men, 10 tetraplegic persons previously habituated to electrically stimulated cycling exercise for 0.4 to 7 years, and 10 nondisabled controls. OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects underwent quantitative Doppler ultrasound examination of the common femoral artery (CFA). End-diastolic arterial images and arterial flow-velocity profiles obtained at rest and following five minutes of suprasystolic thigh occlusion were computer digitized for analysis of heart rate (HR), CFA peak systolic velocity (PSV), CFA cross-sectional area (CSA), flow velocity integral (FVI), and computed CFA inflow volume (IV). RESULTS: No group main effects were observed for resting HR or FVI. At rest, trained tetraplegic men had 14.9% greater PSV, 29.8% larger CSA, and 51.3% greater IV (p values < .05) than sedentary tetraplegic subjects. Resting PSV and IV of the trained subjects did not differ from controls, although CSA was smaller than controls (p < .05). Following occlusion, PSV, CSA, and IV averaged 16.5%, 33.4%, and 65.1% greater for trained tetraplegics persons, respectively, than sedentary tetraplegic subjects (p values < .05). Only CSA differed between the control and the trained groups (p < .05). CONCLUSION: Tetraplegic persons conditioned by electrically stimulated cycling have greater lower extremity blood flow and hyperemic responses to occlusion than do their sedentary counterparts.
Authors: Christof A J Smit; Frank Berenpas; Sonja de Groot; Janneke M Stolwijk-Swuste; Thomas W J Janssen Journal: Spinal Cord Ser Cases Date: 2020-01-24
Authors: Geoff B Coombs; Otto F Barak; Aaron A Phillips; Tanja Mijacika; Zoe K Sarafis; Amanda H X Lee; Jordan W Squair; Tyler D Bammert; Noah M DeSouza; Daniel Gagnon; Andrei V Krassioukov; Zeljko Dujic; Christopher A DeSouza; Philip N Ainslie Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: M Venturelli; M Amann; G Layec; J McDaniel; J D Trinity; A S Fjeldstad; S J Ives; G Yonnet; R S Richardson Journal: Acta Physiol (Oxf) Date: 2013-11-05 Impact factor: 6.311
Authors: Ashraf S Gorgey; Mark K Timmons; David R Dolbow; Justin Bengel; Kendall C Fugate-Laus; Lori A Michener; David R Gater Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2016-05-07 Impact factor: 3.078