Key result
Congestive heart failure was associated with significantly smaller maximal cross-sectional area of thigh muscles compared to sedentary controls (141 vs. 167 cm2, P < 0.05).
Why the study?
Does skeletal muscle size correlate with muscle function in patients with congestive heart failure compared to sedentary controls?
Case-Control (n=33)
Does skeletal muscle size correlate with muscle function in patients with congestive heart failure compared to sedentary controls?
Skeletal muscle size is reduced in CHF patients and correlates with isometric strength, suggesting that muscle atrophy, rather than impaired force generation per unit area, contributes to exercise limitation.
Supports muscle atrophy contributing to weakness in CHF; hypothesis-generating for size-targeted therapies pending prospective trials.
Abnormalities of skeletal muscle function and metabolism are common in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) and appear to contribute to systemic exercise limitation. Although the mechanism for these differences is unclear, one possibility is skeletal muscle atrophy. In 21 CHF patients and 12 sex- and age-matched sedentary control subjects, we quantified muscle size as maximal cross-sectional area (MCSA) of thigh muscles measured by magnetic resonance imaging and determined the relationship between muscle size and muscle function. Muscle strength was measured as maximum force developed during isometric contractions, and muscle endurance was quantified as the decline in force during 15 consecutive isokinetic knee extensions (measured as ratio of mean peak torque of last 3 and first 3 extensions). MCSAs of thigh muscles (141 +/- 28 vs. 167 +/- 47 cm2, P < 0.05) and knee extensors (62 +/- 13 vs. 75 +/- 13 cm2; P < 0.05) were both significantly smaller in patients than in control subjects. These differences persisted after normalization for body size. Isometric strength was less, but not significantly so, in patients (126 +/- 39 vs. 135 +/- 43 Nm; P = NS), but muscle endurance was markedly impaired (endurance ratio 0.67 +/- 0.14 vs. 0.83 +/- 0.11; P < 0.05). A strong correlation was found between isometric strength (r = 0.76) and MCSA of knee extensors, but only a weak correlation between dynamic endurance and MCSA was seen. We conclude that muscle size is smaller in CHF patients but that maximal force generated per area of muscle is not impaired.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Minotti et al. (1993) conducted a case-control in Congestive heart failure (CHF) (n=33). Congestive heart failure vs. Sedentary control subjects was evaluated on Maximal cross-sectional area (MCSA) of thigh muscles (p=< 0.05). Congestive heart failure was associated with significantly smaller maximal cross-sectional area of thigh muscles compared to sedentary controls (141 vs. 167 cm2, P < 0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: