Oda Hiroyuki, Fujibayashi Mami, Matsumoto Naoyuki, Nishiwaki Masato
Faculty of Health Science, Morinomiya University of Medical Science, Osaka, Japan.
Faculty of Engineering, Osaka Institute of Technology, Osaka, Japan.
Front Physiol. 2022 Jun 6;13:828670. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2022.828670. eCollection 2022.
Electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) has traditionally been employed to improve muscle strength and glucose uptake. EMS may also reduce arterial stiffness, but little is known about whether low-intensity EMS reduces systemic and/or regional arterial stiffness. This study aimed to examine the effects of low-intensity EMS of the lower limbs on segmental arterial stiffness. Fourteen healthy subjects participated in experiments under two different protocols (control resting trial (CT) and electrical stimulation trial (ET)) in random order on separate days. The EMS was applied to the lower limbs at 4 Hz for 20 min at an intensity corresponding to an elevation of approximately 15 beats/min in pulse rate (10.7 ± 4.7% of heart rate reserve). Arterial stiffness was assessed by cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI), CAVI, heart-ankle pulse wave velocity (haPWV), brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV), heart-brachial pulse wave velocity (hbPWV), and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV). In both trials, each parameter was measured at before (Pre) and 5 min (Post 1) and 30 min (Post 2) after trial. After the experiment, CT did not cause significant changes in any arterial stiffness parameters, whereas ET significantly reduced CAVI (from Pre to Post 1: -0.8 ± 0.5 unit < 0.01), CAVI (from Pre to Post 1: -1.2 ± 0.8 unit < 0.01), haPWV (from Pre to Post 1: -47 ± 35 cm/s < 0.01), and baPWV (from Pre to Post 1: -120 ± 63 cm/s < 0.01), but not hbPWV or cfPWV. Arm diastolic blood pressure (BP) at Post 2 was slightly but significantly increased in the CT compared to Pre or Post 1, but not in the ET. Conversely, ankle diastolic and mean BPs at Post 1 were significantly reduced compared to Pre and Post 2 in the ET ( < 0.01). These findings suggest that low-intensity EMS of the lower limbs reduces arterial stiffness, but only in sites that received EMS.
传统上，电肌肉刺激（EMS）被用于增强肌肉力量和促进葡萄糖摄取。EMS还可能降低动脉僵硬度，但对于低强度EMS是否能降低全身和/或局部动脉僵硬度，人们了解甚少。本研究旨在探讨下肢低强度EMS对节段性动脉僵硬度的影响。14名健康受试者在不同日期按照随机顺序参与了两种不同方案（对照静息试验（CT）和电刺激试验（ET））下的实验。以对应于脉搏率升高约15次/分钟（心率储备的10.7±4.7%）的强度，对下肢施加4Hz的EMS，持续20分钟。通过心踝血管指数（CAVI）、CAVI、心踝脉搏波速度（haPWV）、肱踝脉搏波速度（baPWV）、心肱脉搏波速度（hbPWV）和颈股脉搏波速度（cfPWV）评估动脉僵硬度。在两项试验中，每个参数均在试验前（Pre）、试验后5分钟（Post 1）和30分钟（Post 2）进行测量。实验后，CT未导致任何动脉僵硬度参数发生显著变化，而ET显著降低了CAVI（从Pre到Post 1：-0.8±0.5单位 < 0.01）、CAVI（从Pre到Post 1：-1.2±0.8单位 < 0.01）、haPWV（从Pre到Post 1：-47±35cm/s < 0.01）和baPWV（从Pre到Post 1：-120±63cm/s < 0.01），但未降低hbPWV或cfPWV。与Pre或Post 1相比，CT中Post 2时的手臂舒张压（BP）略有但显著升高，但ET中未出现这种情况。相反，与Pre和Post 2相比，ET中Post 1时的脚踝舒张压和平均BP显著降低（< 0.01）。这些发现表明，下肢低强度EMS可降低动脉僵硬度，但仅在接受EMS的部位有效。
