Damage protective effects conferred by low-intensity eccentric contractions on arm, leg and trunk muscles

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

European Journal of Applied Physiology

ISSN

1439-6327

Volume

119

Issue

5

First Page

1055

Last Page

1064

PubMed ID

30778759

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

School

Centre for Exercise and Sports Science Research / School of Medical and Health Sciences

RAS ID

29691

Funders

Funding information available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-019-04095-9

Comments

Huang, M.-J., Nosaka, K., Wang, H.-S., Tseng, K.-W., Chen, H.-L., Chou, T.-Y., & Chen, T. C. (2019). Damage protective effects conferred by low-intensity eccentric contractions on arm, leg and trunk muscles. European journal of applied physiology, 119(5), 1055–1064. Available here

Abstract

PURPOSE: Low-intensity eccentric contractions with a load corresponding to 10% of maximal voluntary isometric contraction strength (10% EC) attenuate muscle damage in a subsequent bout of higher-intensity eccentric contractions performed within 2 weeks for the elbow flexors, knee flexors and knee extensors. However, it is not known whether this strategy could be applied to other muscles. This study investigated whether 10% EC would confer damage protective effect on high-intensity eccentric contractions (80% EC) for nine different muscle groups.

METHODS: Untrained young men were placed to an experimental or a control group (n = 12/group). Experimental group performed 50 eccentric contractions with a load corresponding to 10% EC at 2 days prior to 50 eccentric contractions with 80% EC for the elbow flexors and extensors, pectoralis, knee flexors and extensors, plantar flexors, latissimus, abdominis and erector spinae. Control group performed 80% EC without 10% EC. Changes in maximal voluntary isometric contraction strength (MVC) and muscle soreness, plasma creatine kinase (CK) activity and myoglobin concentration after 80% EC were compared between groups by a mixed-factor ANOVA.

RESULTS: MVC recovered faster (e.g., 6-31% greater MVC at 5 days post-exercise), and peak muscle soreness was 36-54% lower for Experimental than Control group for the nine muscles (P < 0.05). Increases in plasma CK activity and myoglobin concentration were smaller for Experimental (e.g., peak CK: 2763 ± 3459 IU/L) than Control group (120,360 ± 50,158 IU/L).

CONCLUSIONS: These results showed that 10% EC was effective for attenuating the magnitude of muscle damage after 80% EC for all muscles, although the magnitude of the protective effect differed among the muscles.

DOI

10.1007/s00421-019-04095-9

Access Rights

subscription content

Link to Full Text

Share

 
COinS