Low intensity, high frequency vibration training to improve musculoskeletal function in a mouse model of volumetric muscle loss

This study's objective was to investigate the extent to which two different levels of low-intensity vibration training (0.6 g or 1.0 g) affected musculoskeletal structure and function after a volumetric muscle loss (VML) injury in male C57BL/6J mice. All mice received a unilateral VML injury to the posterior plantar flexors. Mice were randomized into a control group (no vibration; VML-noTX), or one of two experimental groups. The two experimental groups received vibration training for 15-min/day, 5-days/week for 8 weeks at either 0.6 g (VML-0.6 g) or 1.0 g (VML-1.0 g) beginning 3-days after induction of VML. Muscles were analyzed for contractile and metabolic adaptations. Tibial bone mechanical properties and geometric structure were assessed by a three-point bending test and microcomputed tomography (µCT). Body mass-normalized peak isometric-torque was 18% less in VML-0.6 g mice compared with VML-noTx mice (p = 0.030). There were no statistically significant differences of vibration intervention on contractile power or muscle oxygen consumption (p ≥ 0.191). Bone ultimate load, but not stiffness, was ~16% greater in tibias of VML-1.0 g mice compared with those from VML-noTx mice (p = 0.048). Cortical bone volume was ~12% greater in tibias of both vibration groups compared with VML-noTx mice (p = 0.003). Importantly, cross-section moment of inertia, the primary determinant of bone ultimate load, was 44% larger in tibias of VML-0.6 g mice compared with VML-noTx mice (p = 0.006). These changes indicate that following VML, bones are more responsive to the selected vibration training parameters than muscle. Vibration training represents a possible adjuvant intervention to address bone deficits following VML.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Orthopaedic Research®
Published
2024-11-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.26023
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Effects of Vibration on Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.96

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Low intensity, high frequency vibration training to improve musculoskeletal function in a mouse model of volumetric muscle loss

Jun‐Won Heo, Marion A. Cooley, Daniel B. Hoffman, Jarrod A. Call et al.
2 citations
Journal of Orthopaedic Research®
Effects of Vibration on Health
0.96
article

Low intensity, high frequency vibration training to improve musculoskeletal function in a mouse model of volumetric muscle loss

Jun‐Won Heo, Marion A. Cooley, Daniel B. Hoffman, Jarrod A. Call, Sarah M. Greising, Albino G. Schifino, Gordon L. Warren, Caroline C. Morris, Matthew Campbell, Roger X. Zhong
article en
2 citations

Abstract

This study's objective was to investigate the extent to which two different levels of low-intensity vibration training (0.6 g or 1.0 g) affected musculoskeletal structure and function after a volumetric muscle loss (VML) injury in male C57BL/6J mice. All mice received a unilateral VML injury to the posterior plantar flexors. Mice were randomized into a control group (no vibration; VML-noTX), or one of two experimental groups. The two experimental groups received vibration training for 15-min/day, 5-days/week for 8 weeks at either 0.6 g (VML-0.6 g) or 1.0 g (VML-1.0 g) beginning 3-days after induction of VML. Muscles were analyzed for contractile and metabolic adaptations. Tibial bone mechanical properties and geometric structure were assessed by a three-point bending test and microcomputed tomography (µCT). Body mass-normalized peak isometric-torque was 18% less in VML-0.6 g mice compared with VML-noTx mice (p = 0.030). There were no statistically significant differences of vibration intervention on contractile power or muscle oxygen consumption (p ≥ 0.191). Bone ultimate load, but not stiffness, was ~16% greater in tibias of VML-1.0 g mice compared with those from VML-noTx mice (p = 0.048). Cortical bone volume was ~12% greater in tibias of both vibration groups compared with VML-noTx mice (p = 0.003). Importantly, cross-section moment of inertia, the primary determinant of bone ultimate load, was 44% larger in tibias of VML-0.6 g mice compared with VML-noTx mice (p = 0.006). These changes indicate that following VML, bones are more responsive to the selected vibration training parameters than muscle. Vibration training represents a possible adjuvant intervention to address bone deficits following VML.

Journal of Orthopaedic Research®Vol. 43(3)
University of Minnesota (US), University of Georgia (US), Georgia State University (US), Augusta University (US)
U.S. Department of Defense, National Institutes of Health, Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Effects of Vibration on Health
0.96
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.