↓ Skip to main content

Pregnancy-induced adaptations in intramuscular extracellular matrix of rat pelvic floor muscles

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
12 X users
patent
2 patents
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pregnancy-induced adaptations in intramuscular extracellular matrix of rat pelvic floor muscles
Published in
American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.02.018
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marianna Alperin, Timothy Kaddis, Rajeswari Pichika, Mary C. Esparza, Richard L. Lieber

Abstract

Birth trauma to pelvic floor muscles is a major risk factor for pelvic floor disorders. Intramuscular extracellular matrix determines muscle stiffness, supports contractile component, and shields myofibers from mechanical strain. Our goal was to determine whether pregnancy alters extracellular matrix mechanical and biochemical properties in a rat model, which may provide insights into the pathogenesis of pelvic floor muscle birth injury. To examine whether these effects were unique to pelvic floor muscles, we also studied a hind limb muscle. Passive mechanical properties of Coccygeus, Iliocaudalis, Pubocaudalis, and Tibialis Anterior were compared among 3-month old Sprague-Dawley virgin, late-pregnant, and postpartum rats. Muscle tangent stiffness was calculated as the slope of the stress-sarcomere length curve between 2.5 and 4.0 μm, obtained from a stress-relaxation protocol at a bundle level. Elastin and collagen isoform concentrations were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Enzymatic and glycosylated collagen crosslinks were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. Data were compared using repeated measures two-way analysis of variance with Tukey's post-hoc testing. Correlations between mechanical and biochemical parameters were assessed by linear regressions. Significance was set to p < 0.05. Results are reported as mean ± standard error of mean. Pregnancy significantly increased stiffness in coccygeus (P<0.05) and pubocaudalis (P<0.0001) relative to virgin controls, with no change in iliocaudalis. Postpartum, pelvic floor muscle stiffness did not differ from virgins, (P>0.3). A substantial increase in collagen V in in coccygeus and pubocaudalis was observed in late-pregnant, compared to virgin animals, (P<0.001). Enzymatic crosslinks decreased in coccygeus (P<0.0001) and pubocaudalis (P<0.02) in pregnancy, while glycosylated crosslinks were significantly elevated in late-pregnant rats in all pelvic floor muscles (P<0.05). Correlations between muscle stiffness and biochemical parameters were inconsistent. In contrast to the changes observed in pelvic floor muscles, the tibialis anterior was unaltered by pregnancy. In contrast to other pelvic tissues, pelvic floor muscle stiffness increased in pregnancy, returning to pre-pregnancy state postpartum. This adaptation may shield myofibers from excessive mechanical strain during parturition. Biochemical alterations in pelvic floor muscle extracellular matrix due to pregnancy include increase in collagen V and a differential response in enzymatic vs. glycosylated collagen crosslinks. The relationships between pelvic floor muscle biochemical and mechanical parameters remain unclear.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 19%
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Researcher 5 9%
Professor 5 9%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 13%
Engineering 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 14 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 17 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,905,618
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
#1,856
of 13,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,631
of 409,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
#57
of 310 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 409,908 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 310 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.