High-intensity high-volume swimming induces more robust signaling through PGC-1α and AMPK activation than sprint interval swimming in <i>m. triceps brachii</i>

We aimed to test whether high-intensity high-volume training (HIHVT) swimming would induce more robust signaling than sprint interval training (SIT) swimming within the m. triceps brachii due to lower metabolic and oxidation. Nine well-trained swimmers performed the two training procedures on separate randomized days. Muscle biopsies from m. triceps brachii and blood samples were collected at three different time points: a) before the intervention (pre), b) immediately after the swimming procedures (post) and c) after 3 h of rest (3 h). Hydroperoxides, creatine kinase (CK), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) were quantified from blood samples, and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ coactivator 1α (PGC-1α) and the AMPKpTHR172/AMPK ratio were quantified by Western blot analysis. PGC-1α, sirtuin 3 (SIRT3), superoxide-dismutase 2 (SOD2), and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) mRNA levels were also quantified. SIT induced a higher release of LDH (

High-intensity high-volume swimming induces more robust signaling through PGC-1α and AMPK activation than sprint interval swimming in m. triceps brachii

We aimed to test whether high-intensity high-volume training (HIHVT) swimming would induce more robust signaling than sprint interval training (SIT) swimming within the m. triceps brachii due to lower metabolic and oxidation. Nine well-trained swimmers performed the two training procedures on separate randomized days. Muscle biopsies from m. triceps brachii and blood samples were collected at three different time points: a) before the intervention (pre), b) immediately after the swimming procedures (post) and c) after 3 h of rest (3 h). Hydroperoxides, creatine kinase (CK), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) were quantified from blood samples, and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ coactivator 1α (PGC-1α) and the AMPKpTHR172/AMPK ratio were quantified by Western blot analysis. PGC-1α, sirtuin 3 (SIRT3), superoxide-dismutase 2 (SOD2), and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) mRNA levels were also quantified. SIT induced a higher release of LDH (

Novel Benchmark Values for Open Major Anatomic Liver Resection in Non-Cirrhotic Patients. A Multicentric Study of 44 International Expert Centers

OBJECTIVE: This study aims at establishing benchmark values for best achievable outcomes following open major anatomic hepatectomy for liver tumors of all dignities. BACKGROUND: Outcomes after open major hepatectomies vary widely lacking reference values for comparisons among centers, indications, types of resections, and minimally invasive procedures. METHODS: A standard benchmark methodology was used covering consecutive patients, who underwent open major anatomic hepatectomy from 44 high-volume liver centers from 5 continents over a 5-year period (2016-2020). Benchmark cases were low-risk non-cirrhotic patients without significant comorbidities treated in high-volume centers (≥30 major liver resections/year). Benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median values of all centers. Minimum follow-up period was 1 year in each patient. RESULTS: Of 8044 patients, 2908 (36%) qualified as benchmark (low-risk) cases. Benchmark cutoffs for all indications include R0 resection ≥78%; liver failure (grade B/C) ≤10%; bile leak (grade B/C) ≤18%; complications ≥grade 3 and CCI ® ≤46% and ≤9 at 3 months, respectively. Benchmark values differed significantly between malignant and benign conditions so that reference values must be adjusted accordingly. Extended right hepatectomy (H1, 4-8 or H4-8) disclosed a higher cutoff for liver failure, while extended left (H1-5,8 or H2-5,8) were associated with higher cutoffs for bile leaks, but had superior oncologic outcomes, when compared to formal left hepatectomy (H1-4 or H2-4). The minimal follow-up for a conclusive outcome evaluation following open anatomic major resection must be 3 months. CONCLUSION: These new benchmark cutoffs for open major hepatectomy provide a powerful tool to convincingly evaluate other approaches including parenchymal-sparing procedures, laparoscopic/robotic approaches, and alternative treatments, such as ablation therapy, irradiation, or novel chemotherapy regimens