↓ Skip to main content

Time Course and Association of Functional and Biochemical Markers in Severe Semitendinosus Damage Following Intensive Eccentric Leg Curls: Differences between and within Subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2018
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
42 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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
Time Course and Association of Functional and Biochemical Markers in Severe Semitendinosus Damage Following Intensive Eccentric Leg Curls: Differences between and within Subjects
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.00054
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gerard Carmona, Jurdan Mendiguchía, Xavier Alomar, Josep M. Padullés, David Serrano, Lexa Nescolarde, Gil Rodas, Roser Cussó, Ramón Balius, Joan A. Cadefau

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the extent and evolution of hamstring muscle damage caused by an intensive bout of eccentric leg curls (ELCs) by (1) assessing the time course and association of different indirect markers of muscle damage such as changes in the force-generating capacity (FGC), functional magnetic resonance (fMRI), and serum muscle enzyme levels and (2) analyzing differences in the degree of hamstring muscle damage between and within subjects (limb-to-limb comparison).Methods:Thirteen male participants performed six sets of 10 repetitions of an ELC with each leg. Before and at regular intervals over 7 days after the exercise, FGC was measured with maximal isometric voluntary contraction (MVC). Serum enzyme levels, fMRI transverse relaxation time (T2) and perceived muscle soreness were also assessed and compared against the FGC.Results:Two groups of subjects were identified according to the extent of hamstring muscle damage based on decreased FGC and increased serum enzyme levels: high responders (n= 10, severe muscle damage) and moderate responders (n= 3, moderate muscle damage). In the high responders, fMRI T2 analysis revealed that the semitendinosus (ST) muscle suffered severe damage in the three regions measured (proximal, middle, and distal). The biceps femoris short head (BFsh) muscle was also damaged and there were significant differences in the FGC within subjects in the high responders.Conclusion:FGC and serum enzyme levels measured in 10 of the subjects from the sample were consistent with severe muscle damage. However, the results showed a wide range of peak MVC reductions, reflecting different degrees of damage between subjects (high and moderate responders). fMRI analysis confirmed that the ST was the hamstring muscle most damaged by ELCs, with uniform T2 changes across all the measured sections of this muscle. During intensive ELCs, the ST muscle could suffer an anomalous recruitment pattern due to fatigue and damage, placing an excessive load on the BFsh and causing it to perform a synergistic compensation that leads to structural damage. Finally, T2 and MVC values did not correlate for the leg with the smaller FGC decrease in the hamstring muscles, suggesting that long-lasting increases in T2 signals after FGC markers have returned to baseline values might indicate an adaptive process rather than damage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 35 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 49 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 49 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 10 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,331,407
of 25,383,278 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#728
of 15,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,963
of 450,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#19
of 304 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,383,278 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,586 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 450,262 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 304 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.