Muscle Adaptations to Heavy-Load and Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training Methods

Potential Moderators of the Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Training on Muscle Strength and Hypertrophy: A Meta-analysis Based on a Comparison with High-Load Resistance Training

BACKGROUND

While it has been examined whether there are similar magnitudes of muscle strength and hypertrophy adaptations between low-load resistance training combined with blood-flow restriction training (BFR-RT) and high-load resistance training (HL-RT), some important potential moderators (e.g., age, sex, upper and lower limbs, frequency and duration etc.) have yet to be analyzed further. Furthermore, training status, specificity of muscle strength tests (dynamic versus isometric or isokinetic) and specificity of muscle mass assessments (locations of muscle hypertrophy assessments) seem to exhibit different effects on the results of the analysis. The role of these influencing factors, therefore, remains to be elucidated.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the effects of BFR- versus HL-RT on muscle adaptations, when considering the influence of population characteristics (training status, sex and age), protocol characteristics (upper or lower limbs, duration and frequency) and test specificity.

METHODS

Studies were identified through database searches based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) pre- and post-training assessment of muscular strength; (2) pre- and post-training assessment of muscular hypertrophy; (3) comparison of BFR-RT vs. HL-RT; (4) score ≥ 4 on PEDro scale; (5) means and standard deviations (or standard errors) are reported or allow estimation from graphs. In cases where the fifth criterion was not met, the data were requested directly from the authors.

RESULTS

The main finding of the present study was that training status was an important influencing factor in the effects of BFR-RT. The trained individuals may gain greater muscle strength and hypertrophy with BFR-RT as compared to HL-RT. However, the results showed that the untrained individuals experienced similar muscle mass gains and superior muscle strength gains in with HL-RT compared to BFR-RT.

CONCLUSION

Compared to HL-RT, training status is an important factor influencing the effects of the BFR-RT, in which trained can obtain greater muscle strength and hypertrophy gains in BFR-RT, while untrained individuals can obtain greater strength gains and similar hypertrophy in HL-RT.

Quadriceps vascular occlusion does not alter muscle action or balance: A cross-sectional study

Background

Partial vascular occlusion (PVO) can increase muscle strength and hypertrophy without joint overload. However, PVO could increase the possibility of imbalances and injuries during physical activity.

Objectives

To identify changes in strength, muscle activation, and postural control during the use of PVO in young women.

Method

A total of 14 healthy women aged between 18 and 30 years were evaluated. Dynamometry was used to analyse the strength of the quadriceps muscle, and surface electromyography to evaluate quadriceps muscle activity. A force platform was utilised to assess postural control, static single-legged support, single-legged squat, and climbing and descending stairs. Participants were randomly assigned to the evaluations either with or without PVO. The results were compared and correlated.

Results

The performance of static, dynamic, or stair exercises, with or without PVO, did not indicate differences in muscle strength and recruitment (p > 0.05). The use of PVO improved the velocity of anteroposterior (AP) oscillation of static postural control (p = 0.001). We found a moderate negative correlation between muscle strength and postural control during the ascending stairs task with the use of PVO (r = -0.54; r = -0.59), while in the group without PVO, the correlation was moderate to high (r = -0.55; r = -0.76).

Conclusion

The use of PVO did not impair muscle strength and recruitment of the quadriceps or postural control in healthy women.

Clinical Implications

Partial vascular occlusion can be used during dynamic exercises without impairing the balance and muscle strength of the quadriceps during its execution.

No Differences in Exercise Performance, Perceptual Response, or Safety Were Observed Among 3 Blood Flow Restriction Devices

Purpose

To compare 3 separate blood flow restriction (BFR) systems in their capacity to reduce repetitions to failure, impact perceptual responses, and cause adverse events during a low-load free-flow exercise.

Methods

The study included healthy subjects aged 18 years or older who presented to an ambulatory-care sports medicine clinic. On day 1, participants' demographic characteristics and anthropomorphic measurements were recorded. Each participant performed dumbbell biceps curl repetitions to failure using 20% of his or her 1-repetition maximum weight with each arm. Participants were exposed to 3 different tourniquet systems for familiarization. On day 2, each participant's arm was randomized to a cuff system, and the participant performed 2 sets of biceps curl repetitions to failure with the cuff inflated. Repetitions to failure, rating of perceived effort (RPE), rating of perceived discomfort, and pulse oxygenation levels were recorded after each set. On day 3, participants completed a survey of their perceived delayed-onset muscle soreness.

Results

The final analysis was performed on 42 arms, with 14 limbs per system. The study population had a mean age of 28.7 ± 2.4 years and a mean body mass index of 24.9 ± 4.3. All 3 systems successfully reduced repetitions to failure compared with unrestricted low-load exercise from baseline to BFR set 1 and from baseline to BFR set 2. There were no significant between-group differences among BFR systems regarding the number of repetitions to failure performed at baseline versus BFR set 1 or BFR set 2. The Delfi Personalized Tourniquet System (PTS) cohort had the greatest reductions in repetitions to failure from BFR set 1 to BFR set 2 (P = .002) and reported the highest RPE after set 2 (P = .025).

Conclusions

The Delfi PTS, SmartCuffs Pro, and BStrong BFR systems were each safe and were able to significantly reduce repetitions to failure compared with a low-load free-flow condition when used in a BFR exercise protocol. The Delfi PTS system may produce a higher RPE with prolonged use in comparison to the other systems.

Level of Evidence

Level II, prospective cohort study.

Acute and Chronic Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Training in Physically Active Patients With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Muscle atrophy and loss of knee function are common findings after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Rehabilitation through blood flow restriction (BFR) has gained clinical relevance when combined with low loads to improve these disorders in recent years.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rehabilitation effectiveness of ACL reconstruction with the use of BFR on pain, functionality, strength, and muscle mass in physically active people.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed, Web of Science, and MEDLINE was performed on March 31, 2023, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials with active adults who underwent ACL surgery were included. They had to compare conventional treatments with the use of BFR, reporting values of pain, functionality, strength, or cross-sectional area (CSA). Articles whose participants presented concomitant injuries and whose intervention combined the use of BFR with treatments other than resistance training were excluded.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study design, population, cuff pressure, and main outcomes including strength, quadriceps CSA, pain, and functionality.

RESULTS

Six studies out of a total of 389 were included (152 participants; 90 men and 62 women). These included studies showed no differences on CSA or strength when comparing BFR training with high loads exercise. BFR has demonstrated improvements in knee functionality and pain compared with other interventions such as immobilization or high loads training.

CONCLUSION

The use of low loads combined with BFR improves pain, strength, functionality, and CSA. In addition, knee pain reduction and functionality are greater with BFR compared with the use of high loads or immobilization.

Mechanisms of mechanical overload-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy: current understanding and future directions

Mechanisms underlying mechanical overload-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy have been extensively researched since the landmark report by Morpurgo (1897) of "work-induced hypertrophy" in dogs that were treadmill trained. Much of the preclinical rodent and human resistance training research to date supports that involved mechanisms include enhanced mammalian/mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) signaling, an expansion in translational capacity through ribosome biogenesis, increased satellite cell abundance and myonuclear accretion, and postexercise elevations in muscle protein synthesis rates. However, several lines of past and emerging evidence suggest that additional mechanisms that feed into or are independent of these processes are also involved. This review first provides a historical account of how mechanistic research into skeletal muscle hypertrophy has progressed. A comprehensive list of mechanisms associated with skeletal muscle hypertrophy is then outlined, and areas of disagreement involving these mechanisms are presented. Finally, future research directions involving many of the discussed mechanisms are proposed.

Effects of left thigh blood flow restriction exercise on muscle strength and golf performance in amateur golfers

This study aimed to investigate the effect of lower-extremity strengthening exercise (LSE) with and without blood flow restriction (BFR) on the left thigh on golf performance. Eighteen amateur golfers with more than 1 year of golf experience participated in the study and were randomly divided into two groups: LSE+BFR group (LSE with BFR on the left thigh, n=9) and LSE group (LSE without BFR, n=9). The LSEs consisted of squats, lunges, and standing leg curls. All exercises were performed 3 times a week for 6 weeks. Changes in thigh muscle strength, plantar foot pressure (weight transfer), and golf performance, such as club head speed, ball speed, and carry distance were measured before and after the exercise program. Right knee extension (P<0.001) and left knee extension and flexion (P<0.001) strength were higher in the LSE+BFR group than in the LSE group. The changes in plantar foot pressure confirmed that smooth weight transfer appeared in E1 (event 1) (address) (P<0.05) of the LSE+BFR group, which confirmed that the carry distance (P<0.05) of the LSE+BFR group improved after the exercise program. The results of this study showed that BFR muscle strengthening exercise are more effective than basic simple muscle strengthening exercise in improving golf performance through muscle strength and weight transfer improvement.

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.

Acute effect of low-load resistance exercise with blood flow restriction on oxidative stress biomarkers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this review was to analyze the acute effects of low-load resistance exercise with blood flow restriction (LLE-BFR) on oxidative stress markers in healthy individuals in comparison with LLE or high-load resistance exercise (HLRE) without BFR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. These searches were performed in CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL and Virtual Health Library- VHL, which includes Lilacs, Medline and SciELO. The risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed through the PEDro scale and GRADE system, respectively.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized clinical trials were included in this review (total n = 158 subjects). Results showed lower post-exercise damage to lipids (SMD = -0.95 CI 95%: -1.49 to -0. 40, I2 = 0%, p = 0.0007), proteins (SMD = -1.39 CI 95%: -2.11 to -0.68, I2 = 51%, p = 0.0001) and redox imbalance (SMD = -0.96 CI 95%: -1.65 to -0.28, I2 = 0%, p = 0.006) in favor of LLRE-BFR compared to HLRE. HLRE presents higher post-exercise superoxide dismutase activity but in the other biomarkers and time points, no significant differences between conditions were observed. For LLRE-BFR and LLRE, we found no difference between the comparisons performed at any time point.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence from randomized trials, providing very low or low certainty of evidence, this review demonstrates that LLRE-BFR promotes less oxidative stress when compared to HLRE but no difference in levels of oxidative damage biomarkers and endogenous antioxidants between LLRE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Register number: PROSPERO number: CRD42020183204.

Beneficial Role of Blood Flow Restriction Exercise in Heart Disease and Heart Failure Using the Muscle Hypothesis of Chronic Heart Failure and a Growing Literature

Background: Blood flow restriction exercise (BFRE) has become a common method to increase skeletal muscle strength and hypertrophy for individuals with a variety of conditions. A substantial literature of BFRE in older adults exists in which significant gains in strength and functional performance have been observed without report of adverse events. Research examining the effects of BFRE in heart disease (HD) and heart failure (HF) appears to be increasing for which reason the Muscle Hypothesis of Chronic Heart Failure (MHCHF) will be used to fully elucidate the effects BFRE may have in patients with HD and HF highlighted in the MHCHF.

Methods: A comprehensive literature review was performed in PubMed and the Cochrane library through February 2022. Inclusion criteria were: 1) the study was original research conducted in human subjects older than 18 years of age and diagnosed with either HD or HF, 2) study participants performed BFRE, and 3) post-intervention outcome measures of cardiovascular function, physical performance, skeletal muscle function and structure, and/or systemic biomarkers were provided. Exclusion criteria included review articles and articles on viewpoints and opinions of BFRE, book chapters, theses, dissertations, and case study articles.

Results: Seven BFRE studies in HD and two BFRE studies in HF were found of which four of the HD and the two HF studies examined a variety of measures reflected within the MHCHF over a period of 8–24 weeks. No adverse events were reported in any of the studies and significant improvements in skeletal muscle strength, endurance, and work as well as cardiorespiratory performance, mitochondrial function, exercise tolerance, functional performance, immune humoral function, and possibly cardiac performance were observed in one or more of the reviewed studies.

Conclusion: In view of the above systematic review, BFRE has been performed safely with no report of adverse event in patients with a variety of different types of HD and in patients with HF. The components of the MHCHF that can be potentially improved with BFRE include left ventricular dysfunction, inflammatory markers, inactivity, a catabolic state, skeletal and possibly respiratory muscle myopathy, dyspnea and fatigue, ANS activity, and peripheral blood flow. Furthermore, investigation of feasibility, acceptability, adherence, adverse effects, and symptoms during and after BFRE is needed since very few studies have examined these important issues comprehensively in patients with HD and HF.