首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Myokine Response to High-Intensity Interval vs. Resistance Exercise: An Individual Approach
【2h】

Myokine Response to High-Intensity Interval vs. Resistance Exercise: An Individual Approach

机译:高强度间歇性肌力反应与抵抗运动的关系:个体化方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Purpose: This study aimed to compare the response to acute exercise of several myokines/hormones involved in metabolic function between two types of training sessions that are growing in popularity for their purported cardiometabolic benefits, high-intensity interval (HIIT) and resistance training (RT).>Methods: Seventeen healthy, non-athletic men (23 ± 3 years) participated in this cross-over study. They randomly performed a HIIT [with short (HIIT1) or long (HIIT2) intervals] or a RT session. The concentration of fibroblast-growth factor (FGF) 21, follistatin, ghrelin, interleukin-15, irisin, myostatin, and peptide YY was measured at baseline and 0, 1, 3, 24, 48, and 72 h post-exercise. An individual approach was adopted to determine the rate of responsiveness to each specific cytokine and training mode.>Results: A significant condition (session type) by time interaction (p = 0.004) effect was observed for FGF21, with RT eliciting a greater area under the curve (AUC) concentration than HIIT1 (p = 0.02). The AUC for follistatin was significantly greater after HIIT2 compared with RT (p = 0.02). Individual responsiveness to all session types ranged between 19 and 93% depending on the cytokine. However, most subjects (71–100%) responded positively for all cytokines (except for irisin, with only 53% of responders) after 1+ session type.>Conclusion: Except for FGF21, our results show no overall differences in the myokine response to HIIT or RT. A considerable individual variability was observed, with some subjects responding to some but not other training session types. Notwithstanding, most responded to at least one training session. Thus, it is mostly the individual response of each subject rather than general recommendations on type of training session (i.e., RT vs. HIIT or HIIT subtypes) that must be taken into consideration for maximizing cardiometabolic benefits in the context of personalized exercise prescription.
机译:>目的:本研究旨在比较两种训练课程对参与代谢功能的几种肌元/激素的急性运动的反应,这两类训练课程因其据称的心脏代谢益处,高强度间隔而日益流行( HIIT)和抵抗力训练(RT)。>方法: 17位健康的非运动型男性(23±3岁)参加了这项交叉研究。他们随机进行HIIT [间隔短(HIIT1)或长间隔(HIIT2)]或RT会话。在基线和运动后0、1、3、24、48和72小时测量成纤维细胞生长因子(FGF)21,卵泡抑素,生长素释放肽,白介素15,虹膜素,肌生长抑制素和肽YY的浓度。 >结果:通过时间相互作用(p = 0.004)对FGF21观察到了一种显着状况(会话类型),结果表明: RT引起的曲线下面积(AUC)大于HIIT1(p = 0.02)。 HIIT2后,卵泡抑素的AUC显着高于RT(p = 0.02)。根据细胞因子的不同,对所有会话类型的个体反应率在19%至93%之间。但是,大多数受试者(71–100%)在1+会话类型后对所有细胞因子(虹膜素除外,只有53%的应答者)阳性反应。>结论:除FGF21外,我们的结果显示没有肌动蛋白对HIIT或RT反应的总体差异。观察到个体差异很大,有些受试者对某些培训课程类型有反应,但没有其他。尽管如此,大多数人还是对至少一个培训课程做出了回应。因此,在个性化运动处方的背景下,最大程度地考虑心脏代谢益处时,必须考虑的是每个受试者的个人反应,而不是一般的训练课程建议(即RT vs. HIIT或HIIT亚型)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号