Acute Effects of Resistance Training with Blood Flow Restriction on Achilles Tendon Thickness

Effects of low-load blood flow restriction training in healthy adult tendons: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effects of low-load blood flow restriction training (LL-BFR) on healthy adult tendons.

DESIGN

A systematic review with meta-analysis.

LITERATURE SEARCH

Six electronic databases were searched by two researchers.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

Clinical trials comparing the effects of LL-BFR to high-load resistance training (HL-RT) or low-load resistance training (LL-RT) in healthy adult tendons.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers selected the eligible clinical trials, and one reviewer exported the data. Two reviewers evaluated the study quality and risk of bias using the PEDro scale and the ROB2 scale. We performed meta-analysis where appropriate using a random-effects model. We rated the quality of evidence using GRADE.

RESULTS

Six studies were eligible. We analyzed tendon cross-sectional area (CSA) and tendon stiffness as the outcomes. Across all comparisons, there was low-to moderate-quality evidence of a difference between LL-BFR and LL-RT immediately after exercise. There was high-quality evidence of no difference between LL-BFR and HL-RT in the long term.

CONCLUSION

The effects of LL-BFR on the tendons depends on the time and dose of the intervention. LL-BFR could be useful to increase the CSA of the tendons in a similar or superior way to HL-RT after 8 weeks of intervention.

Blood flow restriction training does not negatively alter the mechanical strength or histomorphology of uninjured equine superficial digital flexor tendons

BACKGROUND

Low load exercise training with blood flow restriction (BFR) has become increasingly used by human physical therapists to prescribe controlled exercise following orthopaedic injury; its effects on the equine superficial digital flexor tendon (SDFT), however, are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate outcomes of pressure specific BFR walking exercise on uninjured equine SDFT biomechanics and histomorphology.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled in vivo experiment.

METHODS

Four forelimbs of four horses were exposed to 40 BFR-walk sessions (10-min interval walking) on a treadmill over a 56-day study period with their contralateral forelimbs serving as untreated controls. Similarly, four forelimbs of four control horses were exposed to 40 sham cuff walk sessions. On study Day 56, all horses (n = 8) were humanely euthanised and forelimb SDFTs underwent non-destructive biomechanical testing and corresponding histomorphological analysis. Significance in biomechanical parameters between treatment groups was analysed using a mixed-effects ANOVA with Tukey's post-hoc tests.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences in SDFT stiffness for both first (p = 0.02) and last cycles (p = 0.03) were appreciated within the BFR treated group only, with BFR exposed forelimbs being significantly stiffer than the contralateral unexposed forelimbs. When normalised to cross-sectional area, no significant differences were appreciated among treatment groups in elastic modulus for the first (p = 0.5) or last cycles (p = 0.4). No histological differences were appreciated among treatment groups according to Bonar, Movin, or musculotendinous junction evaluation criteria.

MAIN LIMITATIONS

Short-term comparisons were performed in a small sample population without correlation to performance outcome measures. Optimal occlusion percentages and walk protocols remain unknown.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated no negative impact of BFR on mechanical strength of the equine SDFT; however, evidence suggests that BFR results in increased tendon stiffness based on biomechanical testing and subsequent calculations. No consistent detrimental histomorphological changes were seen.

Effects of 4-Week Low-Load Resistance Training with Blood Flow Restriction on Muscle Strength and Left Ventricular Function in Young Swimmers: A Pilot Randomized Trial

Low-load resistance training combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) is known to result in muscle hypertrophy and strength similar to that observed with higher loads. However, the effects of resistance training with BFR on cardiac structure and cardiac function remain largely unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this randomized study was to compare the effects of conventional high-load resistance training (HL-RT) with the effects of low-load resistance training with BFR (LL-BFR) on muscle strength and left ventricular function. Sixteen young swimmers (mean ± standard deviation: age = 19.7 ± 1.6 years, body mass = 78.9 ± 9.7 kg, body height = 180.8 ± 5.8 cm) were randomly allocated to a conventional HL-RT group (n = 8) or a LL-BFR group (n = 8) with a pressure band (200 mmHg) placed on both thighs of participants for 4 weeks (3 days•week-1). Outcome measures were taken at baseline and after 4 weeks of training, and included body composition, one-repetition maximum (1RM) back squat, and echocardiography measures. The 1RM back squat significantly improved (partial eta squared (Ƞ2) = 0.365; p = 0.013) in HL-RT (mean difference (Δ) = 6.6 kg; [95% confidence interval (CI) -7.09 to 20.27]) and LL-BFR groups (Δ = 14.7 kg; [95% CI 3.39 to 26.10]), with no main effect of group or group × time interaction (p > 0.05). Interventricular septum end-systolic thickness showed a slight but statistically significant increase in LL-BFR and HL-RT groups (Ƞ2 = 0.253; p = 0.047), yet there was no main effect of group or group × time interaction (p > 0.05). There were no statistically significant changes (p > 0.05) in other cardiac structure or function parameters (e.g., left ventricular (LV) mass, LV cardiac output, LV ejection fraction, LV stroke volume) after the training programs. Results suggest that 4 weeks of HL-RT and LL-BFR improve muscle strength similarly with limited effects on left ventricular function in young swimmers.

The effects of upper body blood flow restriction training on muscles located proximal to the applied occlusive pressure: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Blood flow restriction combined with low load resistance training (LL-BFRT) is associated with increases in upper limb muscle strength and size. The effect of LL-BFRT on upper limb muscles located proximal to the BFR cuff application is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of LL-BFRT compared to low load, or high load resistance training (LL-RT, HL-RT) on musculature located proximal to cuff placement.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two reviewers independently evaluated the risk of bias using the PEDro scale. We performed a meta-analysis using a random effects model, or calculated mean differences (fixed-effect) where appropriate. We judged the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

The systematic literature searched yielded 346 articles, of which 9 studies were eligible. The evidence for all outcomes was of very low to low certainty. Across all comparisons, a significant increase in bench press and shoulder flexion strength was found in favor of LL-BFRT compared to LL-RT, and in shoulder lean mass and pectoralis major thickness in favor of the LL-BFRT compared to LL-RT and HL-RT, respectively. No significant differences were found between LL-BFRT and HL-RT in muscle strength.

CONCLUSION

With low certainty LL-BFRT appears to be equally effective to HL-RT for improving muscle strength in upper body muscles located proximal to the BFR stimulus in healthy adults. Furthermore, LL-BFRT may induce muscle size increase, but these adaptations are not superior to LL-RT or HL-RT.

Low-Load Resistance Training With Blood Flow Restriction Is Effective for Managing Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LLRT-BFR) when compared to LLRT with sham-BFR in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET). DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Forty-six patients with LET were randomly assigned to a LLRT-BFR or a LLRT with sham-BFR treatment group. All patients received soft tissue massage, supervised exercises with BFR or sham intervention (twice a week for 6 weeks), advice, and a home exercise program. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity, patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) score, pain-free grip strength, and global rating of change, measured at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. Between-group differences were evaluated using mixed-effects models with participant-specific random effects for continuous data. Global rating of change was analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Statistically significant between-group differences were found in favor of LLRT-BFR compared to LLRT with sham-BFR in pain intensity at 12-week follow-up (-1.54, 95% CI: -2.89 to -0.18; P = .026), pain-free grip strength ratio at 6-week follow-up (0.20, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.34; P = .005), and PRTEE at 6- and 12-week follow-up (-11.92, 95% CI: -20.26 to -3.59; P = .006, and -15.23, 95% CI: -23.57 to -6.9; P<.001, respectively). At 6- and 12-weeks, patients in the LLRT-BFR group had greater odds of reporting complete recovery or significant improvement (OR = 6.0, OR = 4.09, respectively). CONCLUSION: Low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction produced significantly better results compared to the LLRT with sham-BFR for all primary outcomes. Considering the clinically significant between-group improvement in function (>11 points in PRTEE) and the better success rates in the LLRT-BFR group, this intervention may improve recovery in LET. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(12):803-825. Epub: 14 September 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11211.

Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training in Tendon Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review on Intervention Parameters, Physiological Effects, and Outcomes

Objective

To identify current evidence on blood flow restriction training (BFRT) in tendon injuries and healthy tendons, evaluating physiological tendon effects, intervention parameters, and outcomes.

Methods

This scoping review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Databases searched included MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, EMBase, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane library (Controlled trials, Systematic reviews), and five trial registries. Two independent reviewers screened studies at title/abstract and full text. Following screening, data was extracted and charted, and presented as figures and tables alongside a narrative synthesis. Any study design conducted on adults, investigating the effects of BFRT on healthy tendons or tendon pathology were included. Data were extracted on physiological tendon effects, intervention parameters and outcomes with BFRT.

Results

Thirteen studies were included, three on tendinopathy, two on tendon ruptures, and eight on healthy Achilles, patellar, and supraspinatus tendons. A variety of outcomes were assessed, including pain, function, strength, and tendon morphological and mechanical properties, particularly changes in tendon thickness. BFRT intervention parameters were heterogeneously prescribed.

Conclusion

Despite a dearth of studies to date on the effects of BFRT on healthy tendons and in tendon pathologies, preliminary evidence for beneficial effects of BFRT on tendons and clinical outcomes is encouraging. As BFRT is a relatively novel method, definitive conclusions, and recommendations on BFRT in tendon rehabilitation cannot be made at present, which should be addressed in future research, due to the potential therapeutic benefits highlighted in this review.