Key result
An eight-week protocol of neuromuscular electrical stimulation reduced basal heart rate, systolic pressure, and mean arterial pressure in rats with heart failure, whereas photobiomodulation therapy had no effect.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to analyze the effect of neuromuscular electrical stimulation and photobiomodulation on cardiovascular parameters, hemodynamic function, arterial baroreflex sensitivity, and autonomic balance in rats with heart failure.
Does neuromuscular electrical stimulation and/or photobiomodulation therapy improve cardiovascular parameters and autonomic balance in rats with heart failure?
Does neuromuscular electrical stimulation and/or photobiomodulation therapy improve cardiovascular parameters and autonomic balance in rats with heart failure?
Standardized Mean Difference: 1.75
p-value: p=0.017
In a rat model of heart failure, 8 weeks of neuromuscular electrical stimulation reduced basal heart rate and blood pressure, but did not significantly improve baroreflex sensitivity or autonomic control, while photobiomodulation therapy showed no effect.
NMES effects on rat HF parameters require human validation before any clinical consideration; leaves open PBMT utility and autonomic mechanisms in larger models.
The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and photobiomodulation (PBMT) on the cardiovascular parameters, hemodynamic function, arterial baroreflex sensitivity (BRS), and autonomic balance (ANS) of rats with heart failure (HF). Male Wistar rats (220–290 g) were organized into five groups: Sham (n = 6), Control-HF (n = 5), NMES-HF (n = 6), PBMT-HF (n = 6), and NMES + PBMT-HF (n = 6). Myocardial infarction (MI) was induced by left coronary artery ligation. Animals were subjected to an eight-week NMES and PBMT protocol. Statistical analysis included the General Linear Model (GLM) followed by a Bonferroni post-hoc test. Rats of the NMES-HF group showed a higher MI area than the Control-HF (P = 0.003), PBMT-HF (P = 0.002), and NMES + PBMT-HF (P = 0.012) groups. NMES-HF and NMES + PBMT-HF showed higher pulmonary congestion (P = 0.004 and P = 0.02) and lower systolic pressure (P = 0.019 and P = 0.002) than the Sham group. NMES + PBMT-HF showed lower mean arterial pressure (P = 0.02) than the Sham group. Control-HF showed a higher heart rate than the NMES-HF and NMES + PBMT-HF (P = 0.017 and P = 0.013) groups. There was no difference in the BRS and ANS variables between groups. In conclusion, eight-week NMES isolated or associated with PBMT protocol reduced basal heart rate, systolic and mean arterial pressure, without influence on baroreflex sensibility and autonomic control, and no effect of PBMT was seen in rats with HF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Capalonga et al. (2020) studied Heart failure (n=29). Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) vs. Heart failure control (Control-HF) was evaluated on Heart rate (Cohen's d 1.75, p=0.017). An eight-week protocol of neuromuscular electrical stimulation reduced basal heart rate, systolic pressure, and mean arterial pressure in rats with heart failure, whereas photobiomodulation therapy had no effect.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: