Effect of blood flow-restrictive resistance training on metabolic disorder and body composition in older adults with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled study

Introduction

To explore whether blood flow-restrictive resistance exercise (BFRE) can be used as an alternative strategy to moderate-intensity resistance training (RT) to improve metabolic disorder and body composition in older adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

Methods

This is a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Ninety-eight older adults with T2DM were randomly divided into three groups: BFRE group (n = 34), RT group (n = 31) and control group (n = 33). Two exercise groups received supervised collective training for a period of six months, each lasting 50 min, three times a week. The primary outcomes included fasting plasma glucose (FPG), Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood lipids, blood pressure, and body composition. The secondary outcome was muscle performance.

Results

After six months of intervention, the FPG, HbA1c, blood lipids, diastolic blood pressure, body composition, and muscle performance of the two exercise groups were significantly improved relative to the control group and baseline measurements (P < 0.05). There was no significant increase in lean mass between the two exercise groups compared to the control group and baseline (p > 0.05). There was no significant decrease in systolic blood pressure between the two exercise groups compared to the control group (p > 0.05), but it was significantly lower than their baseline (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in all indicators between the two exercise groups at the baseline, third and sixth months of intervention (p > 0.05).

Discussion

BFRE can safely and effectively improve the metabolic disorder and body composition of older adults with T2DM. For elderly exercise beginners, BFRE can be used as an alternative strategy to moderate-intensity resistance training.

Clinical trial registration

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

Acute effects of resistance exercise with blood flow restriction on cardiovascular response: a meta-analysis

Aim: To compare the acute effects of low-load resistance training associated with blood flow restriction (LLRT-BFR) with low-load resistance training (LLRT) and high-load resistance training (HLRT) on cardiovascular outcomes in healthy individuals. Methods: This review was registered and the studies were selected using seven databases. Randomized controlled clinical trials were included that evaluated LLRT-BFR compared with LLRT and HLRT in young individuals for the cardiovascular outcomes. Results: 19 studies were included. In the comparison of LLRT-BFR with HLRT, there were significant differences for cardiac output and heart rate - with reduced values and in favor of LLRT-BFR. Conclusion: There are no greater acute effects of the addition of blood flow restriction, with the exception of the reduction in cardiac output and heart rate for LLRT-BFR compared with HLRT.

Acute hemodynamic responses from Low- load resistance exercise with blood flow restriction in young and older individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Over Trials

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the existing evidence on the acute response of low-load (LL) resistance exercise (RE) with blood flow restriction (BFR) on hemodynamic parameters.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (via Scopus), SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and MedRxiv databases were searched from inception to February 2022.

REVIEW METHODS

Cross-over trials investigating the acute effect of LLRE+BFR vs. passive (no exercise) and active control methods (LLRE or HLRE) on heart rate (HR), systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean (MBP) blood pressure responses.

RESULTS

The quality of the studies was assessed using the PEDro scale, risk of bias using the RoB 2.0 tool for cross-over trials, and certainty of the evidence using the GRADE method. A total of 15 randomized cross-over studies with 466 participants were eligible for analyses. Our data showed that LLRE+BFR increases all hemodynamic parameters compared to passive control, but not compared to conventional resistance exercise. Subgroup analysis did not demonstrate any differences between LLRE+BFR and low- (LL) or high-load (HL) resistance exercise protocols. Studies including younger volunteers presented higher chronotropic responses (HR) than those with older volunteers.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite causing notable hemodynamic responses compared to no exercise, the short-term low-load resistance exercise with BFR modulates all hemodynamic parameters HR, SBP, DBP, and MBP, similarly to a conventional resistance exercise protocol, whether at low or high-intensity. The chronotropic response is slightly higher in younger healthy individuals despite the similarity regarding pressure parameters. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Evaluation of the Post-Training Hypotensor Effect in Paralympic and Conventional Powerlifting

High blood pressure (HBP) has been associated with several complications and causes of death. The objective of the study was to analyze the hemodynamic responses in Paralympic bench press powerlifting (PP) and conventional powerlifting (CP) before and after training and up to 60 minutes (min) after training. Ten PP and 10 CP athletes performed five sets of five repetition maximal bench press exercises, and we evaluated systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure (SBP, DBP, and MBP, respectively), heart rate (HR), heart pressure product (HPP), and myocardial oxygen volume (MVO2). The SBP increased after training (p < 0.001), and there were differences in the post training and 30, 40, and 60 min later (p = 0.021), between 10 and 40 min after training (p = 0.031, η2p = 0.570), and between CP and PP (p =0.028, η2p = 0.570). In the MBP, there were differences between before and after (p = 0.016) and 40 min later (p = 0.040, η2p = 0.309). In the HR, there was a difference between before and after, and 5 and 10 min later (p = 0.002), and between after and 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 min later (p < 0.001, η2p = 0.767). In HPP and MVO2, there were differences between before and after (p = 0.006), and between after and 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 min later (p < 0.001, η2p = 0.816). In CP and PP, there is no risk of hemodynamic overload to athletes, considering the results of the HPP, and training promotes a moderate hypotensive effect, with blood pressure adaptation after and 60 min after exercise.

Hemodynamic response and pulse wave analysis after upper- and lower-body resistance exercise with and without blood flow restriction

Resistance exercise (RE) has been shown to elevate hemodynamics and pulse wave reflection. However, the effects of acute RE with blood flow restriction (BFR) on hemodynamics and pulse wave reflection are unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences between upper- and lower-body RE with and without BFR on hemodynamics and pulse wave reflection. Twenty-three young resistance-trained individuals volunteered for the study. Hemodynamics and pulse wave reflection were assessed at rest, 10, 25, 40, and 55 min after either upper- or lower-body with or without BFR. The upper-body RE (URE) consisted of the latissimus dorsi pulldown and chest press; the lower-body RE (LRE) consisted of knee extension and knee flexion. The BFR condition consisted of four sets of 30, 15, 15, and 15 repetitions at 30% 1-repetition maximum (1RM) while the without BFR condition consisted of four sets of 8 repetitions at 70% 1RM. Heart rate, rate pressure product, and subendocardial viability ratio significantly (p < 0.05) increased after all exercises. Brachial and aortic systolic blood pressure (BP) significantly (p < 0.05) elevated after LRE while brachial and aortic diastolic BP significantly (p < 0.05) reduced after URE. Augmentation pressure, augmentation index (AIx), AIx normalized at 75 bpm, and wasted left ventricular pressure energy significantly (p < 0.05) increased after URE while transit time of reflected wave significantly (p < 0.05) decreased after LRE. URE places greater stress on pulse wave reflection while LRE results in greater responses in BP. Regardless of URE or LRE, the cardiovascular responses between BFR and without BFR are similar.HIGHLIGHTS High-load resistance exercise and low-load resistance exercise with blood flow restriction may produce similar cardiovascular responses.Upper-body resistance exercise generates greater changes on pulse wave reflections while lower-body resistance exercise induces greater elevations in systolic blood pressure.

EFFECTS OF BLOOD FLOW RESTRICTION IN LARGE AND SMALL MUSCLE GROUPS

ABSTRACT Introduction It is known that strength training brings improvements in health and sports performance by causing muscle hypertrophy and increased strength, as well as modifying some hemodynamic and physiological factors. Several strength training methodologies have been developed, one of which is vascular occlusion. There are few studies with large muscle groups due to poor adherence to the training style and the fact that vascular occlusion of large muscle groups is more difficult. Objective To verify and compare the hemodynamic effects of exercise with and without vascular occlusion in different muscle groups. Methods Quantitative crossover study, with cross-sectional and field procedures. The sample consisted of 10 physically active healthy male and female subjects between 18 and 30 years of age. With the cross-over design, all the volunteers participated in 3 groups: intervention with vascular occlusion, intervention without vascular occlusion and the control group. Results Overall, lactate and cholesterol remained elevated after 15 minutes of recovery and blood glucose and blood pressure did not vary among the groups. Conclusion Vascular occlusion training is an effective method for manipulating hemodynamic variables. Evidence level II; Clinical study.

Cardiovascular Acute Effects of Traditional vs. Paired Set Resistance Training in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis

Purpose: This study compared the acute effects of two different resistance training methods on heart rate variability, blood pressure, and rating of perceived exertion in patients with liver cirrhosis. Methods: Ten patients with Child-Pugh A (seven women and three men) participated in two experimental sessions, in random order: The traditional set condition consisted of three sets of six exercises performed in a sequential manner, while the paired set condition consisted of alternating sets between two exercises (three pairs of exercises). Ten repetitions were performed for each set with 70% of a 10 repetition maximum load and with 2 min rest between sets. Blood pressure and heart rate variability were assessed pre-workout and for 60 min post-workout. The rating of perceived exertion was assessed at the end of the third set for each exercise. Results: Significant alterations in heart rate variability were observed when considering the lowest value obtained during recovery, in which the SDNN was reduced in both the traditional set and paired set conditions, as well as the root mean square of standard deviation for the traditional set condition (p < .05). Additionally, for the paired set condition, there was a significant reduction in the HFnu band and a significant increase in the LFnu band (p < .05). Effect size showed reductions in diastolic and mean blood pressure until 30 min in a small magnitude for traditional sets. Conclusion: Similar cardiovascular responses were observed between methods eliciting normal physiological responses within safe limits for patients with liver cirrhosis.

Blood Flow Restriction Training Reduces Blood Pressure During Exercise Without Affecting Metaboreflex Activity

Objective: Blood flow restriction training (BFRT) has been proposed to induce muscle hypertrophy, but its safety remains controversial as it may increase mean arterial pressure (MAP) due to muscle metaboreflex activation. However, BFR training also causes metabolite accumulation that may desensitize type III and IV nerve endings, which trigger muscle metaboreflex. Then, we hypothesized that a period of BFR training would result in blunted hemodynamic activation during muscle metaboreflex.

Methods: 17 young healthy males aged 18–25 yrs enrolled in this study. Hemodynamic responses during muscle metaboreflex were assessed by means of postexercise muscle ischemia (PEMI) at baseline (T0) and after 1 month (T1) of dynamic BFRT. BFRT consisted of 3-min rhythmic handgrip exercise applied 3 days/week (30 contractions per minute at 30% of maximum voluntary contraction) in the dominant arm. On the first week, the occlusion was set at 75% of resting systolic blood pressure (always obtained after 3 min of resting) and increased 25% every week, until reaching 150% of resting systolic pressure at week four. Hemodynamic measurements were assessed by means of impedance cardiography.

Results: BFRT reduced MAP during handgrip exercise (T1: 96.3 ± 8.3 mmHg vs. T0: 102.0 ± 9.53 mmHg, p = 0.012). However, no significant time effect was detected for MAP during the metaboreflex activation (P > 0.05). Additionally, none of the observed hemodynamic outcomes, including systemic vascular resistance (SVR), showed significant difference between T0 and T1 during the metaboreflex activation (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: BFRT reduced blood pressure during handgrip exercise, thereby suggesting a potential hypotensive effect of this modality of training. However, MAP reduction during handgrip seemed not to be provoked by lowered metaboreflex activity.

Pulse wave reflection responses to bench press with and without practical blood flow restriction

Resistance exercise is recommended to increase muscular strength but may also increase pulse wave reflection. The effect of resistance exercise combined with practical blood flow restriction (pBFR) on pulse wave reflection is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences in pulse wave reflection characteristics between bench press with pBFR and traditional high-load bench press in resistance-trained men. Sixteen resistance-trained men participated in the study. Pulse wave reflection characteristics were assessed before and after low-load bench press with pBFR (LL-pBFR), traditional high-load bench press (HL), and a control (CON). A repeated-measures ANOVA was used to evaluate differences in pulse wave reflection characteristics among the conditions across time. There were significant (p ≤ 0.05) interactions for heart rate, augmentation index, augmentation index normalized at 75 bpm, augmentation pressure, time-tension index, and wasted left ventricular energy such that they were increased after LL-pBFR and HL compared with rest and CON, with no differences between LL-pBFR and HL. Aortic pulse pressure (p < 0.001) was elevated only after LL-pBFR compared with rest. In addition, there was a significant (p ≤ 0.05) interaction for aortic diastolic blood pressure (BP) such that it was decreased after LL-pBFR compared with rest and CON but not HL. The subendocardial viability ratio and diastolic pressure-time index were significantly different between LL-pBFR and HL compared with rest and CON. There were no significant interactions for brachial systolic or diastolic BP, aortic systolic BP, or time of the reflected wave. In conclusion, acute bench press resistance exercise significantly altered pulse wave reflection characteristics without differences between LL-pBFR and HL.

Blood pressure response between resistance exercise with and without blood flow restriction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare, by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis, the effects of resistance training with and without blood flow restriction (BFR) on blood pressure (BP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review was composed according to the preferred Reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Searches were carried out in the databases PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. BP was the main outcome for the analysis of the acute, post-exercise, and chronic effect of resistance exercise with and without BFR. Search results were limited to studies investigating the effect of resistance training with and without BFR on acute or chronic BP, published in a scientific peer-reviewed journal in English.

KEY FINDINGS

Seventeen references were eligible. During exercise, the diastolic BP (DBP) was higher in exercise with BFR (ES = 17.84) in comparison to traditional exercise with loads ≥60% 1RM (ES = 5.53; P < 0.01); and the systolic BP (SBP) and DBP were higher during exercise with BFR in hypertensive individuals (ES = 69.83 and 43.66) in comparison to traditional exercise with loads <60% 1RM (ES = 48.05 and 28.37; P < 0.05). In the post-exercise analysis, exercise with BFR presented lower values for SBP (ES = -5.13; P = 0.02) and DBP (ES = -4.70; P < 0.01).

SIGNIFICANCE

Although resistance exercise with BFR resulted in greater post-exercise hypotension than traditional exercise, higher SBP and/or DBP values were observed during exercise with BFR compared to traditional exercise, especially in hypertensive individuals. Thus, exercise with BFR should be prescribed with caution when BP control is necessary during exercise.

Blood flow restriction attenuates eccentric exercise-induced muscle damage without perceptual and cardiovascular overload

The aim of this study was to evaluate the acute effects of high-intensity eccentric exercise (HI-ECC) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) on muscle damage markers, and perceptual and cardiovascular responses. Nine healthy men (26 ± 1 years, BMI 24 ± 1 kg m^- ²) underwent unilateral elbow extension in two conditions: without (HI-ECC) and with BFR (HI-ECC+BFR). The HI-ECC protocol corresponded to three sets of 10 repetitions with 130% of maximal strength (1RM). The ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) and pain (RPP) were measured after each set. Muscle damage was evaluated by range of motion (ROM), upper arm circumference (CIR) and muscle soreness using a visual analogue scale at different moments (pre-exercise, immediately after, 24 and 48 h postexercise). Systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), mean blood pressure (MBP) and heart rate (HR) were measured before exercise and after each set. RPP was higher in HI-ECC+BFR than in HI-ECC after each set. Range of motion decreased postexercise in both conditions; however, in HI-ECC+BFR group, it returned to pre-exercise condition earlier (post-24 h) than HI-ECC (post-48 h). CIR increased only in HI-ECC, while no difference was observed in HI-ECC+BFR condition. Regarding cardiovascular responses, MBP and SBP did not change at any moment. HR showed similar increases in both conditions during exercise while DBP decreased only in HI-ECC condition. Thus, BFR attenuated HI-ECC-induced muscle damage and there was no increase in cardiovascular responses.

Cardiovascular response to bouts of exercise with blood flow restriction

[Purpose] Occlusion training with low-intensity resistance exercises and blood flow restriction increases muscle cross-sectional area and strength. This form of training is used in rehabilitation; therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the effect of one occlusion training session on the cardiovascular response to bouts of exercise. [Subjects and Methods] Two groups took part: a control group without blood flow restriction and an experimental group with blood flow restriction. A single training session was used with the exercise intensity set at 40% of the one repetition maximum. Maximum voluntary contraction, arterial blood pressure, and electrocardiogram measurements were performed. [Results] Heart rate was slightly higher in the control group. The performed training had no effect on diastolic blood pressure in either group, however, a tendency for a small systolic blood pressure increase was observed during the session in the experimental group. JT interval changes did not reveal significant differences between groups. There were no significant changes in ST-segment depression during the exercise or at rest. A lower tendency for JT/RR increases was observed during the repeated exercise tasks with partial blood flow restriction. [Conclusion] Low intensity exercises carried out with a partial blood flow restriction do not result in significant overload of cardiac function.

Effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction on haemodynamics: a systematic review

This study systematically reviewed the available scientific evidence on the changes promoted by low-intensity (LI) resistance training (RT) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) on blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR) and rate-pressure product (RPP). Searches were performed in databases (PubMed, Web of Science^™ , Scopus and Google Scholar), for the period from January 1990 to May 2015. The study analysis was conducted through a critical review of contents. Of the 1 112 articles identified, 1 091 were excluded and 21 met the selection criteria, including 16 articles evaluating BP, 19 articles evaluating HR and four articles evaluating RPP. Divergent results were found when comparing the LI protocols with BFR versus LI versus high intensity (HI) on BP, HR and RPP. The evidence shows that the protocols using continuous BFR following a LIRT session apparently raise HR, BP and RPP compared with LI protocols without BFR, although increases significantly in BP seem to exist between the HI protocols when compared to LI protocols. Haemodynamic changes (HR, SBP, DBP, MBP, RPP) promoted by LIRT with BFR do not seem to differ between ages and body segments (upper or lower), although they are apparently affected by the width of the cuff and are higher with continuous BFR. However, these changes are within the normal range, rendering this method safe and feasible for special populations.