Search

Few studies have compared changes in cardiorespiratory fitness between aerobic training only or in combination with resistance training. In addition, no study to date has compared strength gains between resistance training and combined exercise training in type II diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Purpose: We evaluated the effects of aerobic exercise training (A group), resistance exercise training (R group), combined aerobic and resistance training (A + R group), and sedentary lifestyle (C group) on cardiorespiratory fitness and muscular strength in individuals with T2DM. Methods: Two hundred and fifty-one participants in the Diabetes Aerobic and Resistance Exercise trial were randomly allocated to A, R, A + R, or C. Peak oxygen consumption (V[spacing dot above]O2peak), workload, and treadmill time were determined after maximal exercise testing at 0 and 6 months. Muscular strength was measured as the eight-repetition maximum on the leg press, bench press, and seated row. Responses were compared between younger (aged 39-54 yr) and older (aged 55-70 yr) adults and between sexes. Results: V[spacing dot above]O2peak improved by 1.73 and 1.93 mL O2[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]min-1 with A and A + R, respectively, compared with C (P < 0.05). Strength improvements were significant after A + R and R on the leg press (A + R: 48%, R: 65%), bench press (A + R: 38%, R: 57%), and seated row (A + R: 33%, R: 41%; P < 0.05). There was no main effect of age or sex on training performance outcomes. There was, however, a tendency for older participants to increase V[spacing dot above]O2peak more with A + R (+1.5 mL O2[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]min-1) than with A only (+0.7 mL O2[middle dot]kg-1[middle dot]min-1). Conclusions: Combined training did not provide additional benefits nor did it mitigate improvements in fitness in younger subjects compared with aerobic and resistance training alone. In older subjects, there was a trend to greater aerobic fitness gains with A + R versus A alone.

Background Both the prevalence of breast cancer and the number of breast cancer patients seeking breast reconstruction are increasing, highlighting the importance for evidence to direct the clinician in the follow-up of these patients. Current practice guidelines recommend surveillance mammography of the contralateral breast in all breast cancer patients, and of the ipsilateral breast in women treated with breast-conserving surgery. However, there are no guidelines specifically addressing the role of surveillance mammography for women who have undergone mastectomy and breast reconstruction. Methods A systematic review was conducted to identify studies specifically addressing the issue of surveillance mammography among women with breast reconstruction following treatment for primary breast cancer. Results This systematic review identified eight articles, consisting of case reports and case series, that address the issue of surveillance mammography of the ipsilateral breast in women with breast reconstruction. The articles demonstrated that certain local recurrences are able to be detected by surveillance mammography. Conclusion This study has demonstrated the paucity of evidence and highlighted the need for further research to evaluate this issue.