| Title |
Phototherapy and resistance training prevent sarcopenia in ovariectomized rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lasers in Medical Science, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10103-012-1251-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adalberto Vieira Corazza, Fernanda Rossi Paolillo, Francisco Carlos Groppo, Vanderlei Salvador Bagnato, Paulo Henrique Ferreira Caria |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to histologically and biochemically analyze the effects of light-emitting diode therapy (LEDT) associated with resistance training to prevent sarcopenia in ovariectomized rats. Forty female Wistar rats (12 months old, 295-330 g) were bilaterally ovariectomized and divided into four groups (n = 10 per group): control-sedentary (C), resistance training (T), LEDT-sedentary (L), and LEDT plus resistance training (LT). Trained rats performed a 12-week water-jumping program (3 days per week) carrying a load equivalent to 50-80% of their body mass strapped to their back. Depending on the group protocol, the LED device (850 nm, 100 mW, 120 J/cm(2), spot size 0.5 cm(2)) was used either as the only method or after the resistance training had been performed. The device was used in the single point contact mode (for 10 min). The irradiated region was the center of the greater trochanter of the right femur and the middle third of the rectus femoris muscle was subsequently analyzed histomorphometrically. Significant increases (p < 0.05) were noted for the muscle volume of the T (68.1 ± 19.7%), the L (74.1 ± 5.1%), and the LT (68.2 ± 11.5%) groups compared to the C group (60.4 ± 5.5%). There were also significant increases in the concentrations of IGF-1, IL-1, and TNF-α in the muscles of the treated groups (p < 0.05). Animals in the LT group showed a significant increase in IL-6 compared to T, L, and C groups (p < 0.05). These findings suggest that resistance training and LEDT can prevent sarcopenia in ovariectomized rats. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 72 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 24 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 25% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 26 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2013.
All research outputs
#13,880,538
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#543
of 1,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,331
of 282,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,302 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,341 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.