ArticlePloS one2024
Effect of different running protocols on bone morphology and microarchitecture of the forelimbs in a male Wistar rat model.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is accepted that the metabolic response of bone tissue depends on the intensity of the mechanical loads, but also on the type and frequency of stress applied to it. Physical exercise such as running involves stresses which, under certain conditions, have been shown to have the best osteogenic effects. However, at high intensity, it can be deleterious for bone tissue. Consequently, there is no clear consensus as to which running modality would have the best osteogenic effects.
aimOur objective was to compare the effects of three running modalities on morphological and micro-architectural parameters on forelimb bones.
methodsForty male Wistar rats were randomly divided into four groups: high intensity interval training (HIIT), continuous running, combined running ((alternating HIIT and continuous modalities) and sedentary (control). The morphometry, trabecular microarchitecture and cortical porosity of the ulna, radius and humerus were analyzed using micro-tomography.
resultsAll three running modalities resulted in bone adaptation, with an increase in the diaphyseal diameter of all three bones. The combined running protocol had positive effects on the trabecular thickness in the distal ulna. The HIIT protocol resulted in an increase in both medio-lateral diameter and cortical bone area over total area (Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar) at the ulnar shaft compared with sedentary condition. Moreover, the HIIT protocol decreased the mean surface area of the medulla (Ma.Ar) according to sedentary condition at the ulnar shaft.
conclusionThis study has shown that HIIT resulted in a decrease in trabecular bone fraction in favor of cortical bone area at the ulna.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.