The 30-seconds all-out sprint test on the cycle ergometer was performed by 10 high school and 13 college men’s cyclists. In addition, this study investigated their best time for 200 m (200mTT) and 1000 m (1000mTT) time trials in the velodrome. This study clarifies the relationship between muscle thickness of thigh, shank, and trunk and 1) the average speed for the 200mTT and 2) the 1000mTT in the field, and 3) the mean power of the 30-seconds all-out sprint cycling test. 1) The average speed for the 200mTT significantly correlated with the muscle thickness of posterior shank and front and lateral abdomen. 2) The average speed for the 1000mTT significantly correlated with the muscle thickness of posterior thigh and shank and front and lateral abdomen. 3) The mean power of the 30-seconds all-out sprint cycling test significantly correlated with the muscle thickness of anterior and posterior thigh, posterior shank, and front and lateral abdomen. Except for the average speed for the 200mTT and 1000mTT, the mean power of the 30-seconds all-out sprint cycling test was significantly related to the muscle thickness of anterior thigh. These results suggest that increasing muscle thickness of posterior thigh and shank and front and lateral abdomen is important for enhancing performance in sprint cycling.

Background/Aims: The Lyon Consensus defined parameters based on upper endoscopy and 24-hour combined multichannel intraluminal impedancepH (MII-pH), that conclusively establish the presence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, the true role of upper endoscopy and MII-pH to evaluate patients with extraesophageal symptoms (EES) has not been well established. Hypopharyngeal MII (HMII), which directly measures laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) events, has been utilized to evaluate patients with EES suggestive of LPR. Methods: This was a retrospective study involving patients with EES for > 12 weeks despite proton pump inhibitor therapy, and had no endoscopic confirmatory evidence for GERD and negative MII-pH. All patients were subsequently referred for further evaluation of EES with “unknown” etiology and underwent laryngoscopy and HMII. Based on HMII, abnormal proximal exposure (APE) was defined as LPR ≥ 1/day and/or full column reflux (reflux 2 cm distal to the upper esophageal sphincter) > 4/day. Patients with APE were offered antireflux surgery (ARS) and the outcome of ARS was objectively assessed using Reflux Symptom Index. Results: Of 21 patients with EES which was thought to be GERD-unrelated based on endoscopy and MII-pH, 17 patients (81%) had APE. Eight patients with APE who had undergone ARS had significant symptomatic improvement in the Reflux Symptom Index score (19.6 ± 4.9 pre-ARS to 5.8 ± 1.4 post-ARS, P = 0.008). Conclusions A conventional diagnostic approach using endoscopy and MII-pH may not be sufficient to evaluate patients with EES suggestive of LPR. HMII is essential to evaluate patients with EES, and APE could be a reliable indicator for successful treatment outcomes.