Responders to Wide-Pulse, High-Frequency Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Show Reduced Metabolic Demand: A 31P-MRS Study in Humans.

Conventional (CONV) neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) (i.e., short pulse duration, low frequencies) induces a higher energetic response as compared to voluntary contractions (VOL). In contrast, wide-pulse, high-frequency (WPHF) NMES might elicit-at least in some subjects (i.e., responders)-a different motor unit recruitment compared to CONV that resembles the physiological muscle activation pattern of VOL. We therefore hypothesized that for these responder subjects, the metabolic demand of WPHF would be lower than CONV and comparable to VOL. 18 healthy subjects performed isometric plantar flexions at 10% of their maximal voluntary contraction force for CONV (25 Hz, 0.05 ms), WPHF (100 Hz, 1 ms) and VOL protocols. For each protocol, force time integral (FTI) was quantified and subjects were classified as responders and non-responders to WPHF based on k-means clustering analysis. Furthermore, a fatigue index based on FTI loss at the end of each protocol compared with the beginning of the protocol was calculated. Phosphocreatine depletion (ΔPCr) was assessed using 31P magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Responders developed four times higher FTI's during WPHF (99 ± 37 ×103 N.s) than non-responders (26 ± 12 ×103 N.s). For both responders and non-responders, CONV was metabolically more demanding than VOL when ΔPCr was expressed relative to the FTI. Only for the responder group, the ∆PCr/FTI ratio of WPHF (0.74 ± 0.19 M/N.s) was significantly lower compared to CONV (1.48 ± 0.46 M/N.s) but similar to VOL (0.65 ± 0.21 M/N.s). Moreover, the fatigue index was not different between WPHF (-16%) and CONV (-25%) for the responders. WPHF could therefore be considered as the less demanding NMES modality-at least in this subgroup of subjects-by possibly exhibiting a muscle activation pattern similar to VOL contractions.

Cycling Time Trial Is More Altered in Hypobaric than Normobaric Hypoxia

PURPOSE: Slight physiological differences between acute exposure in normobaric hypoxia (NH) and hypobaric hypoxia (HH) have been reported. Taken together, these differences suggest different physiological responses to hypoxic exposure to a simulated altitude (NH) versus a terrestrial altitude (HH). For this purpose, in the present study, we aimed to directly compare the time-trial performance after acute hypoxia exposure (26 h, 3450 min) by the same subjects under three different conditions: NH, HH, and normobaric normoxia (NN). Based on all of the preceding studies examining the differences among these hypoxic conditions, we hypothesized greater performance impairment in HH than in NH. METHODS: The experimental design consisted of three sessions: NN (Sion: FiO2, 20.93), NH (Sion, hypoxic room: FiO2, 13.6%; barometric pressure, 716 mm Hg), and HH (Jungfraujoch: FiO2, 20.93; barometric pressure, 481 mm Hg). The performance was evaluated at the end of each session with a cycle time trial of 250 kJ. RESULTS: The mean time trial duration in NN was significantly shorter than under the two hypoxic conditions (P < 0.001). In addition, the mean duration in NH was significantly shorter than that in HH (P < 0.01). The mean pulse oxygen saturation during the time trial was significantly lower for HH than for NH (P < 0.05), and it was significantly higher in NN than for the two other sessions (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: As previously suggested, HH seems to be a more stressful stimulus, and NH and HH should not be used interchangeability when endurance performance is the main objective. The principal factor in this performance difference between hypoxic conditions seemed to be the lower peripheral oxygen saturation in HH at rest, as well as during exercise.