Training increases the in vivo fracture strength in osteoporotic bone. Protection by muscle contraction examined in rat tibiae

3Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The effect of high-intensity training on the in vivo lower leg fracture strength during muscle contraction was investigated in osteoporotic rats. 20 Wistar rats were ovariectomized and given a low calcium (0.01%) diet. 7 weeks after ovariectomy they were randomized into training (T) and sedentary (S). The S group was kept cage-confined without any intervention. The T group ran on a treadmill with 10° inclination 5/7 days for 8 weeks. A maximum intensity of 27 m/min was reached after 4 weeks. After 8 weeks, the right lower legs of the anesthetized animals were loaded in three-point ventral bending until fracture occurred during electrically-induced muscle contraction. The left tibiae were excised and fractured at the same level as the right tibiae. Weight gain was equal in the two groups. Energy absorption and deflection at fracture were significantly higher in the T group than in the S group in vivo during muscle contraction. In vitro, there were no significant differences in mechanical results. The mediolateral outer diameter was larger in the T group, and the maximal stress that the tibia could withstand was lower than in the S group. We conclude that 8 weeks of high-intensity training of osteoporotic rats increased the structural lower leg strength during muscle contraction. The reduced maximal stress in the training animals indicates a reduction in bone material quality. The increase of in vivo structural strength must reflect an increased protective effect of muscle contraction due to training.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kaastad, T. S., Nordsletten, L., Narum, S., Madsen, J. E., Haug, E., & Reikerås, O. (1996). Training increases the in vivo fracture strength in osteoporotic bone. Protection by muscle contraction examined in rat tibiae. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica, 67(4), 371–376. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453679609002334

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free