Effect of Cuff Pressure on Blood Flow during Blood Flow-restricted Rest and Exercise

Limb dominance does not have a meaningful impact on arterial occlusion pressure

INTRODUCTION

Limb dominancy has been suggested, by some, to influence arterial occlusion pressure (AOP). However, we hypothesized that the differences in AOP between the dominant and nondominant legs were more likely explained by differences in cuff position.

AIMS

To determine the impact of limb dominance, composition, and cuff position on AOP in the context of error associated with measuring AOP twice on the same leg.

METHODS

Fifty-eight adults (30 males) volunteered to have AOP measured on their dominant legs with the cuff bladder covering their inner thighs and on their nondominant legs with the bladder covering their inner and outer thighs (in random order). Thigh circumference and muscle and fat thicknesses were also measured on each leg.

RESULTS

We found evidence for differences in AOP between legs [median δ of -0.222, 95% credible interval: (-0.429, -0.016)] when the cuff position was matched. The mean difference was -2.8 mmHg, and the 95% limit of agreement in a Bland-Altman plot was -24.8 to 19.0 mmHg. When plotting this alongside an error range (i.e., 95% limits of agreement) of taking the same measurement twice from our previous study (Spitz et al., 2020), 52 out of 58 measurements were within the error range. This difference was not due to the cuff position. Additionally, there was no evidence that thigh circumference or composition (muscle/fat thickness) moderated any difference between limbs.

CONCLUSION

The difference in AOP between limbs is small and is mostly indistinguishable from the difference observed from taking the measurement twice on the same limb.

The effect of blood flow-restrictive resistance training on the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in middle-aged patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of blood flow-restrictive resistance training (BFR-RT) on improving metabolic abnormalities, blood pressure (BP), obesity, and 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk in middle-aged patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Method

We conducted a parallel-group, single blind randomized controlled trial. Participants who met the inclusion criteria were randomly divided into control group, BFR-RT group and aerobic exercise (AE) group. Control group received health education and follow-up; Two exercise groups received supervised collective training for a period of six months, three times per week. AE group trained at moderate-intensity for 60 minutes each time, while BFR-RT group trained at low-intensity for 40 minutes each time. The primary outcomes were change in 10-year ASCVD risk index and level, and the secondary outcomes included changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood lipids, BP, and obesity level within and across the three groups at baseline, the third and sixth months of intervention.

Result

Among 93 individuals (control group, n=31; AE, n=30; BFR-RT, n=32) were analyzed. At baseline, there were no significant differences in various indicators among the three groups (p>0.05). After intervention, the 10-year ASCVD risk index and risk level of both exercise groups significantly decreased compared to the control group and baseline (p<0.05), and the risk reduction became more pronounced over time. In the sixth month of intervention, the 10-year ASCVD risk index in the AE group decreased by 27.40%, and that in the BFR-RT group decreased by 26.78%. Meanwhile, apart from lipoprotein (a) and diastolic blood pressure, both exercise groups showed significant improvements in FPG, HbA1c, dyslipidemia, systolic blood pressure, and obesity indicators compared to the control group and baseline (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in various indicators between the two exercise groups (p>0.05).

Conclusion

BFR-RT could reduce the 10-year ASCVD risk in middle-aged T2DM patients for by improving metabolic abnormalities, BP and obesity, and its effect was similar to that of moderate-intensity AE.

Clinical trial registration

https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=178886, identifier ChiCTR2300074357.

Exploring immediate cardiorespiratory responses: low-intensity blood flow restricted cycling vs. moderate-intensity traditional exercise in a randomized crossover trial

PURPOSE

Blood-flow restriction (BFR) endurance training may increase endurance performance and muscle strength similar to traditional endurance training while requiring a lower training intensity. We aimed to compare acute cardiorespiratory responses to low-intensity interval exercise under BFR with moderate-intensity traditional interval exercise (TRA).

METHODS

We conducted a randomized crossover study. The protocol involved three cycling intervals interspersed with 1 min resting periods. With a 48-h washout period, individuals performed the protocol twice in random order: once as BFR-50 (i.e., 50% incremental peak power output [IPPO] and 50% limb occlusion pressure [LOP]) and once as TRA-65 (65% IPPO without occlusion). TRA-65 intervals lasted 2 min, and time-matched BFR-50 lasted 2 min and 18 s. Respiratory parameters were collected by breath-by-breath analysis. The ratings of perceived breathing and leg exertion (RPE, 0 to 10) were assessed. Linear mixed models were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Out of the 28 participants initially enrolled in the study, 24 healthy individuals (18 males and 6 females) completed both measurements. Compared with TRA-65, BFR-50 elicited lower minute ventilation (VE, primary outcome) (-3.1 l/min [-4.4 to -1.7]), oxygen consumption (-0.22 l/min [-0.28 to -0.16]), carbon dioxide production (-0.25 l/min [-0.29 to -0.20]) and RPE breathing (-0.9 [-1.2 to -0.6]). RPE leg was significantly greater in the BFR-50 group (1.3 [1.0 to 1.7]).

CONCLUSION

BFR endurance exercise at 50% IPPO and 50% LOP resulted in lower cardiorespiratory work and perceived breathing effort compared to TRA at 65% IPPO. BFR-50 could be an attractive alternative for TRA-65, eliciting less respiratory work and perceived breathing effort while augmenting perceived leg muscle effort.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05163600; December 20, 2021.

Lower limb blood flow occlusion increases systemic pressor response without increasing brachial arterial blood flow redistribution in women

This study was conducted to investigate the systemic hemodynamic and vascular changes in women during and after two commonly used clinical blood flow restriction (BFR) pressures at rest. There are minimal data regarding the independent effects of BFR on hemodynamic and systemic vascular changes due to pressor response, particularly among women. Therefore, this study investigated BFR-induced alterations in pressor response and systemic flow redistribution at rest during two commonly used pressures (50% and 80% limb occlusion pressure [LOP]). Fifteen women (22.1 ± 4.2 years) completed two randomised sessions involving 8-min of bilateral, lower limb restriction at 50% or 80% LOP followed by 8-min of recovery post-deflation. Changes in vascular (arterial diameter [DIA], time-averaged mean velocity [TAMV], volume flow [VF], and area) and hemodynamic (heart rate [HR] and blood pressure) measures over time (pre-, during, post-occlusion) and by session (50% vs. 80% LOP) were tested using repeated measures analysis of variance. Repeated measures correlations (rrm) quantified common intraindividual associations between BFR-induced hemodynamic and vascular responses. HR increased from baseline during 50% LOP and remained elevated during recovery (p < 0.05). HR increased from baseline during 80% LOP, while tibial VF and TAMV decreased (p < 0.03 for all). HR and TAMV values returned to baseline during recovery, while brachial artery VF decreased (p < 0.05). Changes in HR, brachial VF, and brachial TAMV were similar between 50% and 80% LOP (rrm = 0.32-0.70, p < 0.05 for all). At 80% LOP, changes in HR were positively correlated with brachial VF (rrm = 0.38) and TAMV (rrm = 0.43) and negatively correlated with tibial VF (rrm = -0.36) and TAMV (rrm = -0.30) (p < 0.05 for all). Results suggest that BFR at 80% LOP elicits an acute systemic pressor reflex without concomitant increases in brachial arterial flow, while 50% LOP elicits a subdued response.

Effects of Resistance Exercise with and without Blood Flow Restriction on Acute Hemodynamic Responses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Low-load intensity resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (BFR) is an alternative method for enhancing strength and muscle mass. However, acute cardiovascular responses to a complete training session remain uncertain compared to high-load intensity resistance exercise (HI). Therefore, the objective of this study to examine acute and post-exercise hemodynamic responses to low-load BFR and HI protocols. This systematic review and meta-analysis (RD42022308697) followed PRISMA guidelines to investigate whether the responses of heart rate (HR), blood systolic (SBP), blood diastolic pressure (DBP), and rate pressure product (RPP) immediately after and up to 60 min post-exercise from BFR were consistent with those reported after resistance exercises performed at HI in healthy individuals. Searches using PICO descriptors were conducted in databases from January 2011 to December 2023, and effect sizes were determined by Hedge's g. The selected studies involved 160 participants in nine articles, for which the responses immediately after BFR and HI exercises showed no differences in HR (p = 0.23) or SBP (p = 0.57), but significantly higher DBP (p < 0.01) and lower RPP (p < 0.01) responses were found when comparing BFR to HI. Furthermore, the BFR and HI protocols showed no differences regarding SBP (p = 0.21) or DBP (p = 0.68) responses during a 15 to 60 min post-exercise period. Thus, these results indicated that hemodynamic responses are similar between BFR and HI, with a similar hypotensive effect up to 60 min following exercise.

Measurement of arterial occlusion pressure using straight and curved blood flow restriction cuffs

Arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) is influenced by the characteristics of the cuff used to measure AOP. Doppler ultrasound was used to measure AOP of the brachial and superficial femoral arteries using straight and curved blood flow restriction cuffs in 21 males and 21 females. Vessel diameter and blood flow were evaluated as independent predictors of AOP. Overall, there were no significant differences in AOP when using the straight and curved cuffs in the brachial (129 mmHg vs. 128 mmHg) or superficial femoral artery (202 mmHg vs. 200 mmHg), respectively. Overall, AOP was greater (p < 0.05) in males than in females in the arm (135 mmHg, 123 mmHg) and leg (211 mmHg, 191 mmHg). Brachial (0.376 mm, 0.323 mm) and superficial femoral (0.547 mm, 0.486 mm) arteries were larger (p = 0.016) in males than in females, respectively. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) and arm circumference were predictive of brachial artery AOP, whereas SBP, diastolic blood pressure, thigh circumference, and vessel diameter were predictive of superficial femoral artery AOP. Straight and curved cuffs are efficacious in the measurement of AOP in the arm and leg. Differences in vessel size may contribute to sex differences in AOP but this requires further investigation.

Measurements of Arterial Occlusion Pressure Using Hand-Held Devices

ABSTRACT

Vehrs, PR, Reynolds, S, Allen, J, Barrett, R, Blazzard, C, Burbank, T, Hart, H, Kasper, N, Lacey, R, Lopez, D, and Fellingham, GW. Measurements of arterial occlusion pressure using hand-held devices. J Strength Cond Res 38(5): 873-880, 2024-Arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) of the brachial artery was measured simultaneously using Doppler ultrasound (US), a hand-held Doppler (HHDOP), and a pulse oximeter (PO) in the dominant (DOM) and nondominant (NDOM) arms of males ( n = 21) and females ( n = 23) using continuous (CONT) and incremental (INCR) cuff inflation protocols. A mixed-model analysis of variance revealed significant ( p < 0.05) overall main effects between AOP measured using a CONT (115.7 ± 10.9) or INCR (115.0 ± 11.5) cuff inflation protocol; between AOP measured using US (116.3 ± 11.2), HHDOP (115.4 ± 11.2), and PO (114.4 ± 11.2); and between males (120.7 ± 10.6) and females (110.5 ± 9.4). The small overall difference (1.81 ± 3.3) between US and PO measures of AOP was significant ( p < 0.05), but the differences between US and HHDOP and between HHDOP and PO measures of AOP were not significant. There were no overall differences in AOP between the DOM and NDOM arms. Trial-to-trial variance in US measurements of AOP was not significant when using either cuff inflation protocol but was significant when using HHDOP and PO and a CONT cuff inflation protocol. Bland-Altman plots revealed reasonable limits of agreement for both HHDOP and PO measures of AOP. The small differences in US, HHDOP, and PO measurements of AOP when using CONT or INCR cuff inflation protocols are of minimal practical importance. The choice of cuff inflation protocol is one of personal preference. Hand-held Doppler of PO can be used to assess AOP before using blood flow restriction during exercise.

Neuromuscular Responses and Perceptions of Health Status and Pain-Related Constructs in End-Stage Knee Osteoarthritis During Resistance Training With Blood Flow Restriction

ABSTRACT

Ogrezeanu, DC, López-Bueno, L, Sanchís-Sánchez, E, Carrasco, JJ, Cuenca-Martínez, F, Suso-Martí, L, López-Bueno, R, Cruz-Montecinos, C, Martinez-Valdes, E, Casaña, J, and Calatayud, J. Neuromuscular responses and perceptions of health status and pain-related constructs in end-stage knee osteoarthritis during resistance training with blood flow restriction. J Strength Cond Res 38(4): 762-772, 2024-We aimed to evaluate the neuromuscular responses and their relationship with health status, kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, and chronic pain self-efficacy in patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis during acute resistance training with different levels of blood flow restriction (BFR). Seventeen patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis participated in 3 experimental sessions separated by 3 days, performing 4 sets of knee extensions with low load and 3 levels of concurrent BFR performed in a random order: control (no BFR), BFR at 40% arterial occlusion pressure (AOP), and BFR at 80% AOP. Normalized root-mean-square (nRMS), nRMS spatial distribution (centroid displacement, modified entropy, and coefficient of variation), and normalized median frequency (nFmed) were calculated from the vastus medialis (VM) and lateralis (VL) using high-density surface electromyography. Subjects were asked to report adverse effects after the sessions. In the VM, nRMS was higher with 80% AOP than with 40% AOP ( p = 0.008) and control ( p < 0.001), whereas there were no differences between conditions in the VL. Normalized root-mean-square also showed an association with pain catastrophizing, chronic pain self-efficacy, and health status (VM: -0.50, 0.49, -0.42; VL: -0.39, 0.27, -0.33). Spatial distribution varied between conditions but mostly in the VL. Overall, nFmed did not vary, with only a slight increase in the VL with 40% AOP, between set 3 and 4. BFR during knee extensions at 80% AOP increases VM activity and VL amplitude distribution more than 40% AOP and control. Importantly, muscle activity increases are modulated by pain catastrophizing, chronic pain self-efficacy, and health status in these patients, and kinesiophobia seems to especially modulate entropy.

Exercise-induced hypoalgesia with end-stage knee osteoarthritis during different blood flow restriction levels: Sham-controlled crossover study

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training could be a valuable treatment to induce exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) in patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis. However, the use of BFR in these patients is poorly explored and there is no evidence about the training dosage needed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of resistance training protocols with different occlusion levels of blood flow restriction (BFR) on EIH in patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

Crossover study.

SETTING

University physical exercise laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

26 adults with end-stage knee osteoarthritis.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients performed four sets (30, 15, 15, and 15 repetitions) separated by 1-minute rests of three protocols/sessions of low-load (30% one-repetition-maximum) seated knee extensions with elastic bands and BFR: placebo (sham BFR), BFR at 40% arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and BFR at 80% AOP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pressure Pain Thresholds (PPT) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) collected before, immediately after session, and after 10 minutes.

RESULTS

No differences in EIH were found between the different levels of BFR. However, 80% AOP protocol worsened VAS scores immediately (mean difference [MD]: -21.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] -33.9 to -8.5) while improving PPT immediately (MD affected limb: -.6 [95% CI -1.1 to -.2]); contralateral: -.6 (95% CI -1.0 to -.2]) and at 10 minutes (MD affected limb: -.6 [95% CI) -1.2 to -.1]; contralateral: -.7 [95% CI -1.1 to -.2]; and forearm: -.5 [95% CI -.9 to -.05]) post-exercise compared to baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no EIH difference after using different occlusion levels. EIH is modulated by pain-related psychological constructs and self-perceived health status.

Use of a handheld Doppler to measure brachial and femoral artery occlusion pressure

Objective: Measurement of arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) is essential to the safe and effective use of blood flow restriction during exercise. Use of a Doppler ultrasound (US) is the "gold standard" method to measure AOP. Validation of a handheld Doppler (HHDOP) device to measure AOP could make the measurement of AOP more accessible to practitioners in the field. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of AOP measurements of the brachial and femoral arteries using an HHDOP. Methods: We simultaneously measured AOP using a "gold standard" US and a HHDOP in the dominant and non-dominant arms (15 males; 15 females) and legs (15 males; 15 females). Results: There were no differences in limb circumference or limb volume in the dominant and non-dominant arms and legs between males and females or between the dominant and non-dominant arms and legs of males and females. The differences between US and HHDOP measures of AOP in the dominant and non-dominant arms and legs were either not significant or small (<10 mmHg) and of little practical importance. There were no sex differences in AOP measurements of the femoral artery (p > 0.60). Bland-Altman analysis yielded an average bias (-0.65 mmHg; -2.93 mmHg) and reasonable limits of agreement (±5.56 mmHg; ±5.58 mmHg) between US and HHDOP measures of brachial and femoral artery AOP, respectively. Conclusion: HHDOP yielded acceptable measures of AOP of the brachial and femoral arteries and can be used to measure AOP by practitioners for the safe and effective use of blood flow restriction. Due to the potential differences in AOP between dominant and non-dominant limbs, AOP should be measured in each limb.

Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction in Neurological Disorders: A Systematic Review

There is scientific evidence that Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) is beneficial in healthy people, the elderly and patients with musculoskeletal disorders. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of BFR in patients with neurological disorders. The literature search was conducted up until July 2022 in the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), LILACS, Scopus, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Literature Complete (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO). The PEDro scale was used to analyze the methodological quality of the studies, and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool was employed to evaluate the risk of bias. A total of seven articles were included. BFR seems to be beneficial in neurological disorders. Improvements have been found in sensorimotor function, frequency and step length symmetry, perceived exertion, heart rate and gait speed, walking endurance, fatigue, quality of life, muscles thickness, gluteus density and muscle edema. No improvements were found in lower limb strength or balance. However, results must be taken with caution due to the small number of articles and to the large heterogeneity. More clinical trials are needed. These studies should homogenize the protocols used in larger samples, as well as improve their methodological quality.

Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study

Introduction: The determination of the optimal occlusion level is a key parameter in blood flow restriction (BFR). This study aimed to compare the effects of elastic (BStrong) vs. nylon (Hokanson) BFR cuffs on blood flow in the lower and upper limbs.

Methods: Eleven healthy participants undertook several BFR sessions with 2 different cuffs of similar width on their lower and upper limbs at different pressures [200, 250, 300, 350, and 400 mmHg for BStrong and 0, 40, and 60% of the arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) for Hokanson]. Doppler ultrasound recorded blood flows through the brachial and femoral artery at rest.

Results: With BStrong, only 350 and 400 mmHg pressures were significantly different from resting values (0% AOP). With Hokanson, both 40% and 60% of the AOP were significantly different from resting values (p < 0.05).

Discussion: While both cuffs elicited BFR, they failed to accurately modulate blood flow. Hokanson is appropriate for research settings while BStrong appears to be a convenient tool for practitioners due to its safety (i.e., the impossibility of completely occluding arteries) and the possibility of exercising freely detached from the pump.

Current Trends in Blood Flow Restriction

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to explore how individuals in the United States of America applied BFR/KAATSU devices and administered BFR/KAATSU training. In addition, the study sought to examine safety topics related to BFR/KAATSU training. Methods: The study was completed using survey research. Subjects were recruited through Facebook, email, and word of mouth. The survey was developed, piloted, and finally deployed March 22, 2021-April 21, 2021. Results: In total, 148 consented to the research; 108 completed the survey, and of those 108, 70 indicated current use with BFR/KAATSU equipment. Professions represented included athletic training, personal training, physical therapy, and strength and conditioning. Among those currently using BFR/KAATSU training (n = 70), the following results were found. The most common devices used were inflatable devices (n = 43, 61.4%). Education completed prior to device administration was formal (n = 39, 55.7%) and/or self-directed (n = 37, 52.9%). Barriers were faced by 29 (41.4%) when trying to enact training. Techniques and parameters varied during application. Screening processes were used (n = 50, 71.4%) prior to training. The devices were used to determine restrictive pressure (n = 31, 44.3%), and a supine position was used most when determining initial restrictive pressure (n = 33, 47.1%). For subsequent restrictive pressure measurements, respondents repeated the same method used initially (n = 38, 54.3%). Workload was often defined as the length of time under tension/load (n = 22, 31.4%) and exercise was directly supervised (n = 52, 74.3%). Adverse effects included bruising, lightheadedness, and cramping (n = 15, 21.4%). The devices have also been applied on those with pathology (n = 16, 22.9%). Conclusion: Those using blood flow restriction/KAATSU devices came from several professions and used an assortment of devices for BFR/KAATSU training. Individuals applied devices using a variety of parameters on populations for which efficacy has and has not been well defined.

Impact of Interrepetition Rest on Muscle Blood Flow and Exercise Tolerance during Resistance Exercise

Background and Objectives: Muscle blood flow is impeded during resistance exercise contractions, but immediately increases during recovery. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of brief bouts of rest (2 s) between repetitions of resistance exercise on muscle blood flow and exercise tolerance. Materials and Methods: Ten healthy young adults performed single-leg knee extension resistance exercises with no rest between repetitions (i.e., continuous) and with 2 s of rest between each repetition (i.e., intermittent). Exercise tolerance was measured as the maximal power that could be sustained for 3 min (PSUS) and as the maximum number of repetitions (Reps80%) that could be performed at 80% one-repetition maximum (1RM). The leg blood flow, muscle oxygenation of the vastus lateralis and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were measured during various exercise trials. Alpha was set to p ≤ 0.05. Results: Leg blood flow was significantly greater, while vascular resistance and MAP were significantly less during intermittent compared with continuous resistance exercise at the same power outputs (p < 0.01). PSUS was significantly greater during intermittent than continuous resistance exercise (29.5 ± 2.1 vs. 21.7 ± 1.2 W, p = 0.01). Reps80% was also significantly greater during intermittent compared with continuous resistance exercise (26.5 ± 5.3 vs. 16.8 ± 2.1 repetitions, respectively; p = 0.02), potentially due to increased leg blood flow and muscle oxygen saturation during intermittent resistance exercise (p < 0.05). Conclusions: In conclusion, a brief rest between repetitions of resistance exercise effectively decreased vascular resistance, increased blood flow to the exercising muscle, and increased exercise tolerance to resistance exercise.

Physiological Adaptations to High-Intensity Interval Training Combined with Blood Flow Restriction in Masters Road Cyclists

PURPOSE

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) and blood flow restriction (BFR) training have been used to enhance athletic performance and cardiovascular health. Combining these training modalities might be an effective training modality for masters athletes who seek to enhance athletic performance and to reduce cardiovascular risks.

METHODS

Fifty masters road cyclists age 35-49 yr were randomly assigned to the continuous exercise training (n = 16), continuous plus HIIT (n = 17), and continuous plus BFR training combined with HIIT (BFRIT; n = 17) for 12 wk. Both HIIT and BFRIT were performed on a cycle ergometer twice a week.

RESULTS

Maximal oxygen consumption (V̇O2max) increased in the HIIT and BFRIT groups (P < 0.05). This was accompanied by significant improvements in maximal cardiac output and stroke volume (P < 0.05). Forty-kilometer time trial performance improved in all three groups (P < 0.05). Peak power output increased in both HIIT and BFRIT groups (P < 0.05). Flow-mediated dilation in both brachial and popliteal arteries increased in all three groups (all P < 0.05). There were no significant changes in carotid intima-media thickness and arterial stiffness in any of the groups. Total lean mass, muscle cross-sectional area and thickness in rectus femoris and vastus lateralis, and peak torque of isokinetic knee extension increased only in the BFRIT group (all P < 0.05). Tissue saturation index decreased only in the BFRIT group (P < 0.05). Changes in 40-km time trial performance were associated with corresponding changes in V̇O2max (r = -0.312, P = 0.029) and peak isokinetic extensor torque (r = -0.432, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Including HIIT particularly with BFR in the routine continuous training may be more effective in enhancing performance and physiological functions in masters road cyclists.

A comparison of variability between absolute and relative blood flow restriction pressures

Recommendations are that blood flow restriction (BFR) be applied relative to arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) to provide a similar stimulus.

PURPOSE

Compare variability of the change in blood flow, shear rate, and discomfort between recommended relative pressures and an absolute pressure.

METHODS

During one visit, brachial arterial blood flow was measured in 91 participants using pulse-wave Doppler ultrasonography. After 5-min seated rest, AOP was measured. Following another 5-min rest, blood flow and discomfort were assessed twice before cuff inflation as controls (C1 and C2), then again with a cuff inflated to each BFR pressure (all measures separated by 1-min). Change scores from C1 to all subsequent measures were calculated (i.e., C2-C1; 40%AOP-C1; 80%AOP-C1; 100mmHg-C1). Variability of the changes were compared via pairwise modified Pitman-Morgan tests (α=.008).

RESULTS

Variance (95%CI) of the change for blood flow (mL/min), shear rate (1/sec), and discomfort (AU) had similar trends. C2-C1 differed from all conditions (all p<.001), 40%AOP-C1 differed from 80%AOP-C1 and 100mmHg-C1 (all p<.001), which did not differ (both p≥.117). Blood flow: C2-C1=469.79 (357.90, 644.07), 40%AOP-C1=1263.18 (962.34, 1731.80), 80%AOP-C1=1752.90 (1335.42, 2403.18), 100mmHg-C1=1603.18 (1221.36, 2197.92); Shear rate: C2-C1=6248.24 (4760.10, 8566.15), 40%AOP-C1=14625.30 (11142.06, 20050.95), 80%AOP-C1=22064.02 (16809.13, 30249.27), 100mmHg-C1=20778.76 (15829.98, 28487.21); Discomfort: C2-C1=0.07 (0.05, 0.08), 40%AOP-C1=2.03 (1.55, 2.78), 80%AOP-C1=4.26 (3.25, 5.84), 100mmHg-C1=4.50 (3.43, 6.17).

CONCLUSION

Contrary to previous suggestions, applying relative pressures does not necessarily guarantee a similar stimulus. It seems that higher pressures produce more variable changes even if the external pressure applied is made relative to each individual. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Functional, Physiological and Structural Variables of Muscle in Patients with Chronic Pathologies: A Systematic Review

The main objective of this systematic review of the current literature is to analyze the changes that blood flow restriction (BFR) causes in subjects with neuro-musculoskeletal and/or systemic pathologies focusing on the following variables: strength, physiological changes, structural changes and cardiocirculatory variables. The search was carried out in seven databases, including randomized clinical trials in which therapeutic exercise was combined with the blood flow restriction tool in populations with musculoskeletal pathologies. Outcome variables are strength, structural changes, physiological changes and cardiocirculatory variables. Twenty studies were included in the present study. Although there is a lot of heterogeneity between the interventions and evaluation instruments, we observed how the restriction of blood flow presents significant differences in the vast majority of the variables analyzed. In addition, we observed how BFR can become a supplement that provides benefits when performed with low intensity, similar to those obtained through high-intensity muscular efforts. The application of the BFR technique can provide benefits in the short and medium term to increase strength, muscle thickness and cardiovascular endurance, even improving the physiological level of the cardiovascular system. In addition, BFR combined with low-load exercises also achieves benefits comparable to high-intensity exercises without the application of BFR, benefiting patients who are unable to lift high loads.

Blood flow restriction with different load levels in patients with knee osteoarthritis: protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background

The effectiveness of blood flow restriction training (BFR) in elderly with knee osteoarthritis (OA) is comparable to performing high-intensity protocols (70 to 80% of 1 RM [repetition maximum]) that are known to be effective for improving the muscle strength of knee extensors, with the advantage of generating less particular rating of perceived exertion and pain immediately after training. However, despite being a promising alternative, little is known about the best way to apply the BFR, such as level of pressure and combination or not with other therapeutic modalities. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether different levels of blood flow restriction with low load (BFR + LL) and no load (BFR + rest) are non-inferior to high-intensity resistance exercise (HIRE+BFRplacebo) for pain reduction in patients with knee OA.

Methods/design

This clinical trial is a non-inferiority, five-arm, randomized, active-controlled, single trial which will be carried out in 165 patients of both sexes with knee OA, aged 50 years and older. Participants will be randomly allocated into 5 exercise groups (40% of BFR + LL; 80% of BFR + LL; 40% of BFR + rest; 80% BFR + rest, and HIRE+BFR placebo). A mixed linear model will be used to examine the effect of group-by-time interaction on pain intensity on the WOMAC subscale (primary outcome) and on disease severity, physical functional data, balance data, quality of life, global perceived effect scale, and muscle strength (secondary outcomes). Participants will be analyzed for intention-to-treat, and the statistical assessor blinded to the groups. The collection of outcomes 72 h after completion of the 16 weeks of interventions will be the primary measurement point. Follow-up secondary timepoints will be collected at 20, 28, 40, 52, and 64 weeks after the end of interventions, except for pain during the training, which will be measured immediately at the end of each session. Only the comparison of the primary outcome between the HIRE group with each BFR group will be analyzed in the non-inferiority framework, the other comparisons between the BFR groups for the primary outcome, and all secondary outcomes will be interpreted in the superiority framework.

Discussion

The results of this clinical trial can point out more clearly to ways to optimize the BFR training with the minimum of pain immediately after training, which will allow the offer of an effective and more adherent strengthening training to patients with knee OA.

Trial registration

Registro Brasileiro de Ensaios Clínicos, RBR-93rx9q. Registered on 23 July 2020. Version 1.0.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-05998-3.

Efficacy and Safety of Blood Flow Restriction Training in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of blood flow restriction training (BFRT) in the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHOD

Seven electronic databases were searched to identify trials comparing BFRT and conventional resistance training in a population with knee OA. Studies were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) or risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated to compare outcome measures of the groups. The methodologic quality of selected studies and the quality of evidence were evaluated for included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies were included in this meta-analysis, with very low to moderate risk of bias. The pooled results showed no significant difference between BFRT and conventional resistance training for knee OA, including pain (SMD -0.04 [95% CI -0.31, 0.24], P = 0.79), physical function performance (SMD 0.12 [95% CI -0.55, 0.78], P = 0.73), self-reported function (SMD 0.14 [95% CI -0.24, 0.52], P = 0.48), and adverse events (RR 0.45 [95% CI 0.20, 1.01], P = 0.05). In subgroup analysis, BFRT had a lower incidence of adverse events when compared with high-load resistance training (HLRT).

CONCLUSION

Data from pooled studies showed that BFRT may not have greater efficacy for treating patients with knee OA, and it is less likely to have a higher risk of adverse events. However, limited evidence supports the idea that BFRT is likely safer than HLRT. More evidence with high quality is needed in further research on efficacy and safety.

Acute physiological and perceptual responses to moderate intensity cycling with different levels of blood flow restriction

The aim of this study was to compare: i) the physiological and perceptual responses of low-load exercise [(moderate intensity exercise (MI)] with different levels of blood flow restriction (BFR), and ii) MI with BFR on the bike with high intensity (HI) exercise without BFR. The protocol involved large muscle mass exercise at different levels of BFR, and this differentiates our study from others. Twenty-one moderately trained males (age: 24.6 ± 2.4 years; VO_2peak: 47.2 ± 7.0 ml^.kg^-1.min^-1, mean ± sd) performed one maximal graded exercise test and seven 5-min constant-load cycling bouts. Six bouts were at MI [40% _peak power (P_peak), 60%VO_2peak], one without BFR and five with different levels of BFR (40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80% of estimated arterial occlusion pressure). The HI bout (70%P_peak, 90%VO_2peak) was without BFR. Oxygen uptake (VO₂), heart rate (HR), blood lactate (BLa), rate of perceived exertion (RPE), and tissue oxygen saturation (TSI) were recorded. Regardless of pressure, HR, BLa and RPE during MI-BFR were higher compared to MI (p < 0.05, ES: moderate to very large), and TSI reduction was greater in MI-BFR than MI (p < 0.05, ES: moderate to large). The responses of VO₂, HR, BLa, RPE and TSI induced by the different levels of BFR in MI-BFR were similar. Regardless of pressure, the responses of VO₂, HR, BLa and RPE induced by MI-BFR were lower than HI (p < 0.05), except for TSI. TSI change was similar between MI-BFR and HI. It appears that BFR equal to 40% of arterial occlusion pressure is sufficient to reduce TSI when exercising with a large muscle mass.

Differences in Femoral Artery Occlusion Pressure between Sexes and Dominant and Non-Dominant Legs

Background and Objectives: Blood flow restriction during low-load exercise stimulates similar muscle adaptations to those normally observed with higher loads. Differences in the arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) between limbs and between sexes are unclear. We compared the AOP of the superficial femoral artery in the dominant and non-dominant legs, and the relationship between blood flow and occlusion pressure in 35 (16 males, 19 females) young adults. Materials and Methods: Using ultrasound, we measured the AOP of the superficial femoral artery in both legs. Blood flow at occlusion pressures ranging from 0% to 100% of the AOP was measured in the dominant leg. Results: There was a significant difference in the AOP between males and females in the dominant (230 ± 41 vs. 191 ± 27 mmHg; p = 0.002) and non-dominant (209 ± 37 vs. 178 ± 21 mmHg; p = 0.004) legs, and between the dominant and non-dominant legs in males (230 ± 41 vs. 209 ± 37 mmHg; p = 0.009) but not females (191 ± 27 vs. 178 ± 21 mmHg; p = 0.053), respectively. Leg circumference was the most influential independent predictor of the AOP. There was a linear relationship between blood flow (expressed as a percentage of unoccluded blood flow) and occlusion pressure (expressed as a percentage of AOP). Conclusions: Arterial occlusion pressure is not always greater in the dominant leg or the larger leg. Practitioners should measure AOP in both limbs to determine if occlusion pressures used during exercise should be limb specific. Occlusion pressures used during blood flow restriction exercise should be chosen carefully.

Blood Flow Restricted Exercise and Discomfort: A Review

Spitz, RW, Wong, V, Bell, ZW, Viana, RB, Chatakondi, RN, Abe, T, and Loenneke, JP. Blood flow restricted exercise and discomfort: A Review. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2020-Blood flow restriction exercise involves using a pneumatic cuff or elastic band to restrict arterial inflow into the muscle and block venous return out of the muscle during the exercise bout. The resultant ischemia in conjunction with low-load exercise has shown to be beneficial with increasing muscle size and strength. However, a limitation of using blood flow restriction (BFR) is the accompanying discomfort associated with this type of exercise. Factors that may influence discomfort are applied pressure, width of the cuff, cuff material, sex, and training to failure. The goal of this review was to evaluate the existing literature and elucidate how these factors can be manipulated to reduce discomfort during exercise as well as provide possible directions for future research. Thirty-eight different studies were located investigating BFR and discomfort. It was found that BFR training causes more discomfort than exercise without BFR. However, chronic use of BFR may increase tolerability, but discomfort may still be elevated over traditional non-blood flow restricted exercise. Discomfort can be attenuated by the application of lower applied pressures and stopping short of task failure. Finally, in the upper body, wider cuffs seem to increase ratings of discomfort compared with more narrow cuffs. In conclusion, applying the proper-sized cuff and making the applied pressure relative to both the individual and the cuff applied may attenuate discomfort. Reducing discomfort during exercise may help increase adherence to exercise and rehabilitation programs.