Acute caffeine intake increases muscle oxygen saturation during a maximal incremental exercise test
Ruíz-Moreno C, Lara B, Brito de Souza D, Gutiérrez-Hellín J, Romero-Moraleda B, Cuéllar-Rayo Á, Del Coso J
British journal of clinical pharmacology · 40 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Randomized controlled trial (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2019-11-29 · Br J Clin Pharmacol · vol. 86 · issue 5 · pp. 861–867
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Cited
- 54 citations · more than 93% of similar papers · 3.7× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 35 works
- Access
- Open access (repository copy)
- Research areas
- Coffee research and impacts · Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research · Pharmacology and Obesity Treatment
- Keywords
- Caffeine, Placebo, VO2 max, Crossover study, Oxygen saturation, Medicine, Animal science, Heart rate, Vastus lateralis muscle, Confidence interval, Anesthesia, Exercise physiology, Chemistry, Internal medicine, Oxygen, Skeletal muscle, Blood pressure, Biology
- MeSH
- muscle, skeletal, humans, oxygen, caffeine, exercise test, double-blind method, eating, bicycling, adult, female
7 authors
From ES
- Carlos Ruíz‐MorenoCamilo José Cela University
- Beatriz LaraCamilo José Cela University
- Diego Brito de SouzaCamilo José Cela University
- Jorge Gutiérrez‐HellínUniversidad Francisco de Vitoria; Camilo José Cela University
- Blanca Romero‐MoraledaCamilo José Cela University
- Ángel Cuéllar‐RayoCamilo José Cela University
Abstract
Aims
The main mechanism behind caffeine's ergogenicity lies in its tendency to bind to adenosine receptors, although other mechanisms might be involved. The aim of this investigation was to analyse the effects of caffeine on muscle oxygen saturation during exercise of increasing intensity.
Methods
Thirteen healthy and active individuals volunteered to participate in a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial. During 2 different trials, participants either ingested a placebo (cellulose) or 3 mg/kg of caffeine. After waiting for 60 min to absorb the substances, participants underwent a maximal ramp cycle ergometer test (25 W/min). Near infrared spectrometers were positioned on each leg's vastus lateralis to monitor tissue O2 saturation. Blood lactate concentration was measured 1 min after the end of the exercise test.
Results
In comparison to the placebo, the ingestion of caffeine improved the maximal wattage (258 ± 50 vs 271 ± 54 W, respectively, P < .001, effect size [ES] = 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.35) and blood lactate concentration (11.9 ± 3.8 vs 13.7 ± 3.5 mmol/L, P = .029, ES = 0.38; 95% CI 0.14-0.75) at the end of the test. Caffeine increased muscle oxygen saturation at several exercise workloads with a main effect found in respect to the placebo (F = 6.28, P = .029; ES = 0.30 to 0.54; 95% CI 0.01-0.78). Peak pulmonary ventilation (124 ± 29 vs 129 ± 23 L/min, P = 0.035, ES = 0.25; 95% CI 0.07-0.40) and peak oxygen uptake (3.18 ± 0.70 vs 3.33 ± 0.88 L/min, P = 0.032, ES = 0.26; 95% CI 0.08-0.51) were also increased with caffeine.
Conclusion
Acute ingestion of 3 mg/kg of caffeine improved peak aerobic performance and increased peak pulmonary ventilation. In addition, caffeine induced changes in muscle oxygen saturation during submaximal workloads, suggesting that this mechanism might also contribute to caffeine's ergogenic effect.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.