Ischemic preconditioning of the muscle reduces the metaboreflex response of the knee extensors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study investigated the effect of ischemic preconditioning (IP) on metaboreflex activation following dynamic leg extension exercise in a group of healthy participants. METHOD: Seventeen healthy participants were recruited. IP and SHAM treatments (3 × 5 min cuff occlusion at 220 mmHg or 20 mmHg, respectively) were administered in a randomized order to the upper part of exercising leg's thigh only. Muscle pain intensity (MP) and pain pressure threshold (PPT) were monitored while administrating IP and SHAM treatments. After 3 min of leg extension exercise at 70% of the maximal workload, a post-exercise muscle ischemia (PEMI) was performed to monitor the discharge group III/IV muscle afferents via metaboreflex activation. Hemodynamics were continuously recorded. MP was monitored during exercise and PEMI. RESULTS: IP significantly reduced mean arterial pressure compared to SHAM during metaboreflex activation (mean ± SD, 109.52 ± 7.25 vs. 102.36 ± 7.89 mmHg) which was probably the consequence of a reduced end diastolic volume (mean ± SD, 113.09 ± 14.25 vs. 102.42 ± 9.38 ml). MP was significantly higher during the IP compared to SHAM treatment, while no significant differences in PPT were found. MP did not change during exercise, but it was significantly lower during the PEMI following IP (5.10 ± 1.29 vs. 4.00 ± 1.54). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that IP reduces hemodynamic response during metaboreflex activation, while no effect on MP and PPT were found. The reduction in hemodynamic response was likely the consequence of a blunted venous return.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".