For the marginal means (collapsed across condition), *PRE > POST, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h (p < 0.05); †POST < PRE, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h (p < 0.05); #PRE < POST, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h (p < 0.05). There were no condition x time (p > 0.05) interactions and no main effects for condition (p > 0.05) or time (p > 0.05) for systolic blood pressure (Figure 4a), diastolic selleck screening library blood pressure (Figure 4b), or resting heart rate (Figure 4c). Figure 4 Heart rate
and blood pressure. Data presented are means ± standard error of the mean for (a) systolic blood pressure (mmHg), (b) diastolic blood pressure (mmHg), and (c) heart rate (bpm) during the supplement (dashed line, open circles; ANA) and placebo (solid line, closed circles; PLA) conditions assessed CHIR98014 at baseline (visits 1 or 6)and 72 h after the bout of maximal eccentric exercise.
Discussion The results of the present study did not support our original hypotheses that ANA would improve the recovery of PT, hanging joint angle, relaxed arm circumference, or subjective pain ratings compared to PLA in response to eccentric-induced muscle damage. The protocol used in the present study has been used to elicit muscle damage in previous studies [6, 13, 19, 20]. For example, Beck et al. [13] demonstrated 21-43% decreases in PT of the forearm flexors, while Cockburn et al. [20] reported 15-20% decreases in leg flexion PT. The 23-44% decreases in PT observed in the present study were consistent with Beck et al. [13], but greater than Cockburn et al. [20], which may have been related to the muscle group Osimertinib studied. Nevertheless, Warren et al. [2] suggested that PT is the single best non-invasive indicator of muscle damage resulting from eccentric exercise, therefore,
the results of the present study suggested that the magnitude of muscle damage that occurred was consistent with or greater than previous studies using the same protocol. Interestingly, these previous studies [13, 20] and others [10] have also demonstrated that this muscle damage protocol has elicited decreases in PT that were sensitive to dietary supplement interventions to improve recovery. However, in the present study there were no differences between ANA and PLA conditions during the recovery of PT, hanging joint angle, relaxed arm circumference, or subjective pain rating within 72 h after eccentric exercise. Thus, our conclusion was that ANA supplementation had no effect on recovery of muscle strength, joint stiffness, arm swelling, or pain using this model of muscle damage. Connelly et al.