Metzger J M, Fitts R H
Exp Neurol. 1986 Aug;93(2):320-33. doi: 10.1016/0014-4886(86)90193-7.
This study compared the effect of high- (75 Hz, 1 min) and low- (5 Hz, 1.5 min) frequency stimulation on sarcolemmal action potentials of rat phrenic nerve-diaphragm preparations, measured in vitro at 25 degrees C. High-frequency stimulation reduced peak tetanic tension to 21 +/- 1% (means +/- SE) of initial, whereas 5 Hz stimulation produced less of a decline (71 +/- 2% of initial). Despite an initial faster rate of force recovery after 75-Hz stimulation, tetanic tension was still significantly depressed at 0.25 and 1 min relative to the values after 5-Hz stimulation (P less than 0.05). Resting membrane potential, and action potential overshoot and area were not significantly altered by fatigue. Action potential amplitude (AMP) was initially depressed by repetitive stimulation but increased significantly during recovery (P less than 0.05). No significant difference occurred in AMP recovery between the high- vs. low-frequency stimulation groups. The rate of rise and fall of the action potential was reduced after fatiguing stimulation but increased significantly with time (P less than 0.05). Moreover, the time to peak height of the action potential was prolonged by fatigue but significantly declined to resting values with time (P less than 0.05). During recovery, fatigue from high-frequency stimulation was associated with a greater prolongation in duration and time to baseline of the action potential relative to low-frequency stimulation (P less than 0.05). Action potential variables altered by stimulation generally recovered within 1 to 3 min, whereas peak tetanic tension did not completely return to resting values until 10 to 15 min of recovery. We conclude that high- and low-frequency stimulation elicits virtually identical perturbations in sarcolemmal action potentials, and thus changes in surface membrane properties cannot explain the decreased tetanic tension that follows 75-Hz stimulation. It appears that events distal to the sarcolemma are responsible for fatigue from both high- and low-frequency stimulation.
本研究比较了高频(75Hz,1分钟)和低频(5Hz,1.5分钟)刺激对大鼠膈神经-膈肌标本肌膜动作电位的影响,这些标本于25℃在体外进行测量。高频刺激使强直收缩峰值张力降至初始值的21±1%(平均值±标准误),而5Hz刺激引起的下降较小(为初始值的71±2%)。尽管75Hz刺激后初始力恢复速率较快,但相对于5Hz刺激后的数值,强直收缩张力在0.25分钟和1分钟时仍显著降低(P<0.05)。疲劳对静息膜电位、动作电位超射值和面积无显著影响。动作电位幅度(AMP)最初因重复刺激而降低,但在恢复过程中显著增加(P<0.05)。高频与低频刺激组之间的AMP恢复无显著差异。疲劳刺激后动作电位的上升和下降速率降低,但随时间显著增加(P<0.05)。此外,动作电位达到峰值高度的时间因疲劳而延长,但随时间显著下降至静息值(P<0.05)。在恢复过程中,相对于低频刺激,高频刺激引起的疲劳与动作电位持续时间和恢复到基线的时间延长幅度更大有关(P<0.05)。刺激引起改变的动作电位变量通常在1至3分钟内恢复,而强直收缩峰值张力直到恢复10至15分钟才完全恢复到静息值。我们得出结论,高频和低频刺激在肌膜动作电位上引起的扰动几乎相同,因此表面膜特性的变化不能解释75Hz刺激后强直收缩张力降低的原因。看来肌膜远端的事件是高频和低频刺激疲劳的原因。