Ischaemic preconditioning does not alter the determinants of endurance running performance in the heat

Methodological Variations Contributing to Heterogenous Ergogenic Responses to Ischemic Preconditioning

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) has been repeatedly reported to augment maximal exercise performance over a range of exercise durations and modalities. However, an examination of the relevant literature indicates that the reproducibility and robustness of ergogenic responses to this technique are variable, confounding expectations about the magnitude of its effects. Considerable variability among study methodologies may contribute to the equivocal responses to IPC. This review focuses on the wide range of methodologies used in IPC research, and how such variability likely confounds interpretation of the interactions of IPC and exercise. Several avenues are recommended to improve IPC methodological consistency, which should facilitate a future consensus about optimizing the IPC protocol, including due consideration of factors such as: location of the stimulus, the time between treatment and exercise, individualized tourniquet pressures and standardized tourniquet physical characteristics, and the incorporation of proper placebo treatments into future study designs.

Ischemic Preconditioning, O2 Kinetics, and Performance in Normoxia and Hypoxia

INTRODUCTION

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) before exercise has been shown to be a novel approach to improve performance in different exercise modes in normoxia (NORM). Few studies have been conducted examining potential mechanisms behind these improvements, and less has been done examining its influence during exercise in hypoxia (HYP). Oxygen uptake and extraction kinetics are factors that have been implicated as possible determinants of cycling performance. We hypothesized that IPC would lead to improvements in oxygen extraction and peripheral blood flow kinetics, and this would translate to improvements in cycling time trial (TT) performance in both NORM and HYP.

METHODS

Thirteen men (age, 24 ± 7 yr; V˙O2max, 63.1 ± 5.1 mL·kg·min) participated in the study. Subjects completed trials of each combination of normobaric HYP (FiO2 = 0.16, simulating ~8000 ft/2500 m) or NORM (FiO2 = 0.21) with preexercise IPC protocol (4 × 5 min at 220 mm Hg) or SHAM procedure. Trials included submaximal constant load cycle exercise bouts (power outputs of 15% below gas exchange threshold, and 85% of V˙O2max), and a 5-km cycling performance TT.

RESULTS

Ischemic preconditioning significantly improved 5-km TT time in NORM by 0.9% ± 1.8% compared with SHAM (IPC, 491.2 ± 35.2 s vs SHAM, 495.9 ± 36.0 s; P < 0.05). Ischemic preconditioning did not alter 5-km TT performance times in HYP (P = 0.231). Ischemic preconditioning did, however, improve tissue oxygen extraction in HYP (deoxygenated hemoglobin/myoglobin: IPC, 21.23 ± 10.95 μM; SHAM, 19.93 ± 9.91 μM; P < 0.05) during moderate-intensity exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm that IPC is an effective ergogenic aid for athletes performing 5-km cycling TT bouts in NORM. Ischemic preconditioning did mitigate the declines in tissue oxygen during moderate-intensity exercise in HYP, but this did not translate to a significant effect on mean group performance. These data suggest that IPC may be of benefit for athletes training and competing in NORM.

Ischemic preconditioning and exercise performance: shedding light through smallest worthwhile change

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) has been suggested as a potential ergogenic aid to improve exercise performance, although controversial findings exist. The controversies may be explained by several factors, including the mode of exercise, the ratio between the magnitude of improvement, or the error of measurement and physiological meaning. However, a relevant aspect has been lacking in the literature: the interpretation of the findings considering statistical tests and adequate effect size (ES) according to the fitness level of individuals. Thus, we performed a systematic review with meta-analysis to update the effects of IPC on exercise performance and physiological responses, using traditional statistics (P values), ES, and smallest worth change (SWC) approach contextualizing the IPC application to applied Sports and Exercise performance. Forty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the results show that IPC has a minimal or nonsignificant effect on performance considering the fitness level of the individuals, using statistical approaches (i.e., tests with P value, ES, and SWC). Therefore, IPC procedures should be revised and refined in future studies to evaluate if IPC promotes positive effects on performance in a real-world scenario with more consistent interpretation.

Validity and Reliability of an On-Court Fitness Test for Assessing and Monitoring Aerobic Fitness in Squash

James, C, Tenllado Vallejo, F, Kantebeen, M, and Farra, S. Validity and reliability of an on-court fitness test for assessing and monitoring aerobic fitness in squash. J Strength Cond Res 33(5): 1400-1407, 2019-Current on-court assessments of aerobic fitness in squash are not designed to yield a wealth of physiological data. Moreover, tests may require complex computer equipment or involve simulated racket strokes, which are difficult to standardize at high intensities. This study investigated the validity and reliability of a squash-specific fitness test which can yield both a standalone performance score, as well as pertinent physiological markers such as V[Combining Dot Above]O2max, the lactate turnpoint and oxygen cost, in a sport-specific environment. Eight national squash players completed 3 tests in a counterbalanced order: an incremental laboratory treadmill test (LAB) and 2 on-court fitness tests (STs) that involved repeated shuttle runs at increasing speeds. V[Combining Dot Above]O2max during ST was agreeable with LAB (typical error [TE] = 3.3 ml·kg·min, r = 0.79). The mean bias between LAB and ST was 2.5 ml·kg·min. There were no differences in maximum heart rate, postexercise blood lactate concentration, or end of test rating of perceived exertion between LAB and ST (p > 0.05). The ST was highly reliable, with 74 (10) laps completed in ST1 and 75 (12) laps in ST2 (mean bias = 1 lap, TE = 3 laps, r = 0.97). Physiological markers were also reliable, including V[Combining Dot Above]O2max, (TE = 1.5 ml·kg·min, r = 0.95), the lap number at 4 mMol (TE = 4 laps, r = 0.77), and average V[Combining Dot Above]O2 across the first 4 stages (TE = 0.94 ml·kg·min, r = 0.95). We observed good agreement between LAB and ST for assessing V[Combining Dot Above]O2max and between both on-court trials for assessing test performance and selected physiological markers. Consequently, we recommend this test for monitoring training adaptations and prescribing individualized training in elite squash players.

An overview of ischemic preconditioning in exercise performance: A systematic review

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) is an attractive method for athletes owing to its potential to enhance exercise performance. However, the effectiveness of the IPC intervention in the field of sports science remains mitigated. The number of cycles of ischemia and reperfusion, as well as the duration of the cycle, varies from one study to another. Thus, the aim of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive review examining the IPC literature in sports science. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed (MEDLINE) (from 1946 to May 2018), Web of Science (sport sciences) (from 1945 to May 2018), and EMBASE (from 1974 to May 2018). We included all studies investigating the effects of IPC on exercise performance in human subjects. To assess scientific evidence for each study, this review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The electronic database search generated 441 potential articles that were screened for eligibility. A total of 52 studies were identified as eligible and valid for this systematic review. The studies included were of high quality, with 48 of the 52 studies having a randomized, controlled trial design. Most studied showed that IPC intervention can be beneficial to exercise performance. However, IPC intervention seems to be more beneficial to healthy subjects who wish to enhance their performance in aerobic exercises than athletes. Thus, this systematic review highlights that a better knowledge of the mechanisms generated by the IPC intervention would make it possible to optimize the protocols according to the characteristics of the subjects with the aim of suggesting to the subjects the best possible experience of IPC intervention.

Remote ischemic preconditioning increases accumulated oxygen deficit in middle-distance runners

The mediators underlying the putative benefits of remote ischemic preconditioning (IPC) on dynamic whole body exercise performance have not been widely investigated. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that remote IPC improves supramaximal exercise performance in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I middle-distance runners by increasing accumulated oxygen deficit (AOD), an indicator of glycolytic capacity. A randomized sham-controlled crossover study was employed. Ten NCAA Division I middle-distance athletes [age: 21 ± 1 yr; maximal oxygen uptake (V̇o2max): 65 ± 7 ml·kg−1·min−1] completed three supramaximal running trials (baseline, after mock IPC, and with remote IPC) at 110% V̇o2max to exhaustion. Remote IPC was induced in the right arm with 4 × 5 min cycles of brachial artery ischemia with 5 min of reperfusion. Supramaximal AOD (ml/kg) was calculated as the difference between the theoretical oxygen demand required for the supramaximal running bout (linear regression extrapolated from ~12 × 5 min submaximal running stages) and the actual oxygen demand for these bouts. Remote IPC [122 ± 38 s, 95% confidence interval (CI): 94–150] increased ( P < 0.001) time to exhaustion 22% compared with baseline (99 ± 23 s, 95% CI: 82–116, P = 0.014) and sham (101 ± 30 s, 95% CI: 80–123, P = 0.001). In the presence of IPC, AOD was 47 ± 36 ml/kg (95% CI: 20.8–73.9), a 29% increase compared with baseline (36 ± 28 ml/kg, 95% CI: 16.3–56.9, P = 0.008) and sham (38 ± 32 ml/kg, 95% CI: 16.2–63.0, P = 0.024). Remote IPC considerably improved supramaximal exercise performance in NCAA Division I middle-distance athletes. Greater glycolytic capacity, as estimated by increased AOD, is a potential mediator for these performance improvements.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY Our novel findings indicate that ischemic preconditioning enhanced glycolytic exercise capacity, enabling National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) middle-distance track athletes to run ~22 s longer before exhaustion compared with baseline and mock ischemic preconditioning. The increase in “all-out” performance appears to be due to increased accumulated oxygen deficit, an index of better supramaximal capacity. Of note, enhanced exercise performance was demonstrated in a specific group of in-competition NCAA elite athletes that has already undergone substantial training of the glycolytic energy systems.

Short-Term Heat Acclimation and Precooling, Independently and Combined, Improve 5-km Time Trial Performance in the Heat

James, CA, Richardson, AJ, Watt, PW, Willmott, AGB, Gibson, OR, and Maxwell, NS. Short-term heat acclimation and precooling, independently and combined, improve 5-km time trial performance in the heat. J Strength Cond Res 32(5): 1366-1375, 2018-Following heat acclimation (HA), endurance running performance remains impaired in hot vs. temperate conditions. Combining HA with precooling (PC) demonstrates no additive benefit in intermittent sprint, or continuous cycling exercise protocols, during which heat strain may be less severe compared to endurance running. This study investigated the effect of short-term HA (STHA) combined with mixed methods PC, on endurance running performance and directly compared PC and HA. Nine amateur trained runners completed 5-km treadmill time trials (TTs) in the heat (32° C, 60% relative humidity) under 4 conditions; no intervention (CON), PC, short-term HA (5 days-HA) and STHA with PC (HA + PC). Mean (±SD) performance times were; CON 1,476 (173) seconds, PC 1,421 (146) seconds, HA 1,378 (116) seconds and HA + PC 1,373 (121) seconds. This equated to the following improvements versus CON; PC -3.7%, HA -6.6% and HA + PC -7.0%. Statistical differences were only observed between HA and CON (p = 0.004, d = 0.68, 95% CI [-0.27 to 1.63]) however, similar effect sizes were observed for HA + PC vs. CON (d = 0.70, 95% CI [-0.25 to 1.65]), with smaller effects between PC vs. CON (d = 0.34, 95% CI [-0.59 to 1.27]), HA vs. PC (d = 0.33, 95% CI [-0.60 to 1.26]) and HA + PC vs. PC (d = 0.36, 95% CI [-0.57 to 1.29]). Pilot testing revealed a TT typical error of 16 seconds (1.2%). Precooling offered no further benefit to performance in the acclimated individual, despite modest alleviation of physiological strain. Maintenance of running speed in HA + PC, despite reduced physiological strain, may indicate an inappropriate pacing strategy therefore, further familiarization is recommended to optimize a combined strategy. Finally, these data indicate HA, achieved through cycle training, yields a larger ergogenic effect than PC on 5-km running performance in the heat, although PC remains beneficial when HA is not possible.

Factors affecting occlusion pressure and ischemic preconditioning

PURPOSE

To determine the effect of limb selection (upper/lower), cuff width (small (6 cm)/medium (13 cm) upper; medium/large (18 cm) lower) and anthropometry on arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) in ischemic preconditioning (IPC).

METHODS

Twenty athletes (10 females and 10 males) had surface anthropometry and dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) assessments before using Doppler ultrasound to confirm AOP for each limb. Subsequently, 5 min of occlusion occurred, with near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) measuring muscle oxygenation changes. Resultant AOP was compared between sexes, limbs and cuff sizes using linear regression models.

RESULTS

Mean AOP was higher in the lower limbs than the upper limbs (161 ± 18 vs. 133 ± 12 mm Hg; p < .001), and with smaller cuffs in upper (161 ± 16 vs. 133 ± 12 mm Hg; p < .001), but not lower limbs (161 ± 16 vs. 170 ± 26 mm Hg; p = .222). Sex and resting systolic blood pressure (SBP) accounted for 77% (small cuff) to 83% (medium cuff) of variance in AOP for upper limbs, and 61% (medium cuff) to 63% (large cuff) in lower limbs. Including anthropometry accounted for 82% (small cuff) to 89% (medium cuff) and 78% (medium cuff) to 79% (large cuff) of variance for upper and lower limbs, respectively. Adding DXA variables improved the explained variance up to 83% (small cuff) to 91% (medium cuff) and 79% (medium cuff) to 87% (large cuff) for upper and lower limbs, respectively. NIRS data showed significantly greater tissue oxygenation changes in upper versus lower limbs.

CONCLUSIONS

The AOP in athletes is dependent on limb occluded, sex, SBP, limb and cuff size, and body composition.

Hypoxic Air Inhalation and Ischemia Interventions Both Elicit Preconditioning Which Attenuate Subsequent Cellular Stress In vivo Following Blood Flow Occlusion and Reperfusion

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) is valid technique which elicits reductions in femoral blood flow occlusion mediated reperfusion stress (oxidative stress, Hsp gene transcripts) within the systemic blood circulation and/or skeletal muscle. It is unknown whether systemic hypoxia, evoked by hypoxic preconditioning (HPC) has efficacy in priming the heat shock protein (Hsp) system thus reducing reperfusion stress following blood flow occlusion, in the same manner as IPC. The comparison between IPC and HPC being relevant as a preconditioning strategy prior to orthopedic surgery. In an independent group design, 18 healthy men were exposed to 40 min of (1) passive whole-body HPC (FiO₂ = 0.143; no ischemia. N = 6), (2) IPC (FiO₂ = 0.209; four bouts of 5 min ischemia and 5 min reperfusion. n = 6), or (3) rest (FiO₂ = 0.209; no ischemia. n = 6). The interventions were administered 1 h prior to 30 min of tourniquet derived femoral blood flow occlusion and were followed by 2 h subsequent reperfusion. Systemic blood samples were taken pre- and post-intervention. Systemic blood and gastrocnemius skeletal muscle samples were obtained pre-, 15 min post- (15PoT) and 120 min (120PoT) post-tourniquet deflation. To determine the cellular stress response gastrocnemius and leukocyte Hsp72 mRNA and Hsp32 mRNA gene transcripts were determined by RT-qPCR. The plasma oxidative stress response (protein carbonyl, reduced glutathione/oxidized glutathione ratio) was measured utilizing commercially available kits. In comparison to control, at 15PoT a significant difference in gastrocnemius Hsp72 mRNA was seen in HPC (−1.93-fold; p = 0.007) and IPC (−1.97-fold; p = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in gastrocnemius Hsp32 and Hsp72 mRNA, leukocyte Hsp72 and Hsp32 mRNA, or oxidative stress markers (p > 0.05) between HPC and IPC. HPC provided near identical amelioration of blood flow occlusion mediated gastrocnemius stress response (Hsp72 mRNA), compared to an established IPC protocol. This was seen independent of changes in systemic oxidative stress, which likely explains the absence of change in Hsp32 mRNA transcripts within leukocytes and the gastrocnemius. Both the established IPC and novel HPC interventions facilitate a priming of the skeletal muscle, but not leukocyte, Hsp system prior to femoral blood flow occlusion. This response demonstrates a localized tissue specific adaptation which may ameliorate reperfusion stress.

Defining the determinants of endurance running performance in the heat

In cool conditions, physiologic markers accurately predict endurance performance, but it is unclear whether thermal strain and perceived thermal strain modify the strength of these relationships. This study examined the relationships between traditional determinants of endurance performance and time to complete a 5-km time trial in the heat. Seventeen club runners completed graded exercise tests (GXT) in hot (GXTHOT; 32°C, 60% RH, 27.2°C WBGT) and cool conditions (GXTCOOL; 13°C, 50% RH, 9.3°C WBGT) to determine maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max), running economy (RE), velocity at V̇O2max (vV̇O2max), and running speeds corresponding to the lactate threshold (LT, 2 mmol.l-1) and lactate turnpoint (LTP, 4 mmol.l-1). Simultaneous multiple linear regression was used to predict 5 km time, using these determinants, indicating neither GXTHOT (R2 = 0.72) nor GXTCOOL (R2 = 0.86) predicted performance in the heat as strongly has previously been reported in cool conditions. vV̇O2max was the strongest individual predictor of performance, both when assessed in GXTHOT (r = -0.83) and GXTCOOL (r = -0.90). The GXTs revealed the following correlations for individual predictors in GXTHOT; V̇O2maxr = -0.7, RE r = 0.36, LT r = -0.77, LTP r = -0.78 and in GXTCOOL; V̇O2maxr = -0.67, RE r = 0.62, LT r = -0.79, LTP r = -0.8. These data indicate (i) GXTHOT does not predict 5 km running performance in the heat as strongly as a GXTCOOL, (ii) as in cool conditions, vV̇O2max may best predict running performance in the heat.

No influence of ischemic preconditioning on running economy

PURPOSE

Many of the potential performance-enhancing properties of ischemic preconditioning suggest that the oxygen cost for a given endurance exercise workload will be reduced, thereby improving the economy of locomotion. The aim of this study was to identify whether ischemic preconditioning improves exercise economy in recreational runners.

METHODS

A randomized sham-controlled crossover study was employed in which 18 adults (age 27 ± 7 years; BMI 24.6 ± 3 kg/m²) completed two, incremental submaximal (65-85% VO_2max) treadmill running protocols (3 × 5 min stages from 7.2-14.5 km/h) coupled with indirect calorimetry to assess running economy following ischemic preconditioning (3 × 5 min bilateral upper thigh ischemia) and sham control. Running economy was expressed as mlO₂/kg/km and as the energy in kilocalories required to cover 1 km of horizontal distance (kcal/kg/km).

RESULTS

Ischemic preconditioning did not influence steady-state heart rate, oxygen consumption, minute ventilation, respiratory exchange ratio, energy expenditure, and blood lactate. Likewise, running economy was similar (P = 0.647) between the sham (from 201.6 ± 17.7 to 204.0 ± 16.1 mlO₂/kg/km) and ischemic preconditioning trials (from 202.8 ± 16.2 to 203.1 ± 15.6 mlO₂/kg/km). There was no influence (P = 0.21) of ischemic preconditioning on running economy expressed as the caloric unit cost (from 0.96 ± 0.12 to 1.01 ± 0.11 kcal/kg/km) compared with sham (from 1.00 ± 0.10 to 1.00 ± 0.08 kcal/kg/km).

CONCLUSIONS

The properties of ischemic preconditioning thought to affect exercise performance at vigorous to severe exercise intensities, which generate more extensive physiological challenge, are ineffective at submaximal workloads and, therefore, do not change running economy.