Non-failure blood flow restricted exercise induces similar muscle adaptations and less discomfort than failure protocols

Twenty-five years of blood flow restriction training: What we know, what we don't, and where to next?

Blood flow restriction is a technique that involves inflating a cuff at the proximal portion of the limb with the goal of reducing arterial inflow into the muscle and venous outflow from the muscle. Low-load or low-intensity exercise in combination with blood flow restriction has been consistently shown to augment adaptations over the same/similar exercise without restriction, with changes in muscle size and strength being two of the most commonly measured adaptations. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide an updated narrative review on blood flow restriction. Blood flow restriction's history, methodology, safety, and efficacy are highlighted. We discuss the effects of blood flow restriction on changes in muscle size and strength, and also review work completed on other variables (e.g. bone, resting blood flow, tendon, pain sensitivity, cognition, orthostatic intolerance). We finish by highlighting six possible areas for future research: 1) identifying mechanisms for growth and strength; 2) sex differences in the effects of blood flow restriction; 3) individual responses to blood flow restriction; 4) influence of pressure versus amount of blood flow restricted; 5) application of blood flow restriction with higher-loads; and 6) what considerations should be made to test the effects of blood flow restriction.

Salivary testosterone and cortisol responses to seven weeks of practical blood flow restriction training in collegiate American football players

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a 7-week supplemental BFR training intervention on both acute and chronic alterations in salivary testosterone (sTes) and cortisol (sCort) in collegiate American football players.

Methods

58 males were divided into 4 groups: 3 completed an upper- and lower-body split resistance training routine (H, H/S, H/S/R; H = Heavy, S = Supplemental, R = BFR), with H/S/R performing end-of-session practical BFR training, and H/S serving as the volume-matched non-BFR group. The final group (M/S/R) completed modified resistance training programming with the same practical BFR protocol as H/S/R. Athletes were further split into AM and PM training groups based upon their pre-determined training schedules, in cooperation with University strength and conditioning staff. Practical BFR consisted of end-of-session barbell bench press and back squat using 20% 1 repetition maximum (1RM) for 30-20-20-20 repetitions across 4 sets, with 45-seconds rest. Saliva samples were taken pre- and post- the first lower-body training sessions in week 1 and week 7 (i.e., test 1 and test 2) of the program, yielding four total. sTes and sCort were analyzed using 4-way (4 × 2 × 2 × 2) mixed model ANOVA's.

Results

Hormonal variables all exhibited main effects for time-of-day (p < 0.001). A significant group × time interaction effect (F3,50 = 3.246, p < 0.05) indicated increases in sTes post-training cycle for the H/S/R group only. Further, PM post-exercise sCort decreased from test 1 to test 2 (nmol·L-1: 95% CI: PM test 1 post-exercise = 10.7-17.1, PM test 2 post-exercise = 5.0-8.9). For the testosterone-to-cortisol ratio (T/C), AM pre-exercise was lower than PM (p < 0.05), with no change in post-exercise T/C for both AM and PM conditions when collapsed across testing times.

Discussion

Overall, these findings suggest an ecologically valid method of BFR implementation is capable of inducing heightened concentrations of sTes in well-resistance trained American football athletes, providing additional insight on possible physiological mechanisms underpinning BFR's ability to elicit beneficial muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength adaptations when performed during regimented training programs. Additionally, notable rises in T/C, and a null sCort response post-exercise were observed post-program for all groups, possibly indicative of positive physiological adaptation.

Acute Responses to Different Velocity-Loss Thresholds During Squat Training With and Without Blood-Flow Restriction

PURPOSE

To compare the acute effects on mechanical, metabolic, neuromuscular, and muscle contractile responses to different velocity-loss (VL) thresholds (20% and 40%) under distinct blood-flow conditions (free [FF] vs restricted [BFR]) in full squat (SQ).

METHODS

Twenty strength-trained men performed 4 SQ protocols with 60% 1-repetition maximum that differed in the VL within the set and in the blood-flow condition (FF20: FF with 20% VL; FF40: FF with 40% VL; BFR20: BFR with 20% VL; and BFR40: BFR with 40% VL). The level of BFR was 50% of the arterial occlusion pressure. Before and after the SQ protocols, the following tests were performed: (1) tensiomyography, (2) blood lactate, (3) countermovement jump, (4) maximal voluntary isometric SQ contraction, and (5) performance with the load that elicited a 1 m·s-1 at baseline measurements in SQ.

RESULTS

No "BFR × VL" interactions were observed. BFR protocols resulted in fewer repetitions and lower increases in lactate concentration than FF protocols. The 40% VL protocols completed more repetitions but resulted in lower mechanical performance and electromyography median frequency during the exercise than the 20% VL protocols. At postexercise, the 40% VL protocols also experienced greater blood lactate concentrations, higher alterations in tensiomyography-derived variables, and accentuated impairments in SQ and countermovement-jump performances. The 20% VL protocols showed an increased electromyography median frequency at postexercise maximal voluntary isometric contraction.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite BFR-accelerated fatigue development during exercise, a given VL magnitude induced similar impairments in the distinct performance indicators assessed, regardless of the blood-flow condition.

Progression and perceptual responses to blood flow restriction resistance training among people with multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE

Resistance exercise can attenuate muscular impairments associated with multiple sclerosis (MS), and blood flow restriction (BFR) may provide a viable alternative to prescribing heavy training loads. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the progression of upper and lower body low-load (30% of one-repetition maximum [1RM]) resistance training (RT) with BFR applied intermittently during the exercise intervals (RT + BFR) versus volume-matched heavy-load (65% of 1RM) RT.

METHODS

Men and women with MS (n = 16) were randomly assigned to low-load RT + BFR (applied intermittently) or heavy-load RT and completed 12 weeks (2 × /week) of RT that consisted of bilateral chest press, seated row, shoulder press, leg press, leg extension, and leg curl exercises. Exercise load, tonnage, and rating of perceived exertion were assessed at baseline and every 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Training load increased to a greater extent and sometimes earlier for RT + BFR (57.7-106.3%) than heavy-load RT (42.3-54.3%) during chest press, seated row, and leg curl exercises, while there were similar increases (63.5-101.1%) for shoulder press, leg extension, and leg press exercises. Exercise tonnage was greater across all exercises for RT + BFR than heavy-load RT, although tonnage only increased during the chest press (70.7-80.0%) and leg extension (89.1%) exercises. Perceptions of exertion (4.8-7.2 au) and compliance (97.9-99.0%) were similar for both interventions.

CONCLUSION

The training-induced increases in load, high compliance, and moderate levels of exertion suggested that RT + BFR and heavy-load RT are viable interventions among people with MS. RT + BFR may be a preferred modality if heavy loads are not well tolerated and/or to promote early-phase training responses.

Comparing adaptations from blood flow restriction exercise training using regulated or unregulated pressure systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

No study has examined outcomes derived from blood flow restriction exercise training interventions using regulated compared with unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, we used a systematic review and meta-analyses to compare the chronic adaptations to blood flow restriction exercise training achieved with regulated and unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems.

DATA SOURCES

The electronic database search included using the tool EBSCOhost and other online database search engines. The search included Medline, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Embase and SpringerLink.

METHODS

Included studies utilised chronic blood flow restriction exercise training interventions greater than two weeks duration, where blood flow restriction was applied using a regulated or unregulated blood flow restriction pressure system, and where outcome measures such as muscle strength, muscle size or physical function were measured both pre- and post-training. Studies included in the meta-analyses used an equivalent non-blood flow restriction exercise comparison group.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies were included in the systematic review. Data showed that regulated (n = 47) and unregulated (n = 34) blood flow restriction pressure systems yield similar training adaptations for all outcome measures post-intervention. For muscle strength and muscle size, this was reaffirmed in the included meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

This review indicates that practitioners may achieve comparable training adaptations with blood flow restriction exercise training using either regulated or unregulated blood flow restriction pressure systems. Therefore, additional factors such as device quality, participant comfort and safety, cost and convenience are important factors to consider when deciding on appropriate equipment to use when prescribing blood flow restriction exercise training.

Feasibility and safety of two weeks of blood flow restriction exercise in individuals with spinal cord injury

CONTEXT

Reduced muscle strength and function are common after spinal cord injury (SCI). While low-load blood flow restriction exercise (BFRE) enhances muscle strength in healthy and clinical populations, its safety and feasibility in individuals with SCI remain underexplored.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the feasibility and safety of low-load BFRE in individuals with incomplete SCI.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series.

SETTING

SCI rehabilitation center.

PARTICIPANTS

Six participants with motor incomplete SCI were enrolled in the study.

INTERVENTION

A two-week BFRE intervention for the lower limbs was conducted twice weekly at 40% total arterial occlusion pressure, using 30-40% of 1-repetition maximum loads.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility measures, specifically recruitment and eligibility rates and intervention acceptability, were collected. Blood pressure (BP) responses and specific coagulation markers for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) were assessed as safety measures.

RESULTS

Recruitment and eligibility rates were 2.8% and 6.6% for individuals admitted for first-time rehabilitation (subacute SCI) and 8.3% and 13.9% for 4-week readmission rehabilitation stays (chronic SCI), respectively. Intervention acceptability was high, characterized by 95.8% training adherence and low-to-moderate self-reported pain levels. BP responses and changes in C-reactive protein, Fibrinogen, and D-dimer during the intervention remained within clinically acceptable levels.

CONCLUSION

BFRE was feasible in an SCI rehabilitation setting despite a low recruitment rate. BFRE imposed no heightened risk of DVT or severe BP fluctuations in the present case series. Additionally, no severe adverse events occurred, and only mild complaints were reported. More extensive safety considerations warrant larger-scale exploration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03690700.

Indices of exercise induced muscle damage following low load resistance exercise with blood flow restriction in untrained males

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence regarding the presence and magnitude of exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) following low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LL+BFR), which may be related to the protocol implemented or exercise volume. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to examine the effects of a 75 repetition (BFR-75) (1×30, 3×15) and four sets to volitional failure (BFR-4x) protocols on indices of EIMD among untrained men.

METHODS

Twelve males with no history of lower-body resistance training during the previous six months volunteered for this investigation. One leg was randomly assigned to BFR-75, and the other to BFR-4x. Participants performed isokinetic, unilateral, concentric-eccentric, leg extension muscle actions at 30% of maximal strength with BFR. Indices of EIMD (limb circumference, perceived muscle soreness, pain pressure threshold [PPT], passive range of motion, and maximal strength [MVIC]) were recorded before exercise and 0, 24, 48, 72, and 96-hours post-exercise for each protocol.

RESULTS

There were no significant changes (P>0.05) in limb circumference, PPT, passive range of motion, or MVIC. For both BFR-75 and BFR-4x, perceived muscle soreness increased (P<0.001) similarly 24- (2.5±1.7 AU) and 48-hours (1.9±1.7 AU) post-exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an increase in muscle soreness 24-48 hours post-exercise for both conditions, which may be due to metabolic stress, but this did not affect the force-generating capacity of the muscle (MVIC), suggesting minimal EIMD. The conflicting evidence of EIMD following LL+BFR may be related to differences in restriction time or overall exercise time.

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.

Safety and efficacy of blood flow restriction exercise in individuals with neurological disorders: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review evaluated the safety and efficacy of blood flow restriction exercise (BFRE) on skeletal muscle size, strength, and functional performance in individuals with neurological disorders (ND).

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase. Two researchers independently assessed eligibility and performed data extraction and quality assessments.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Study populations with ND, BFRE as intervention modality, outcome measures related to safety or efficacy.

RESULTS

Out of 443 studies identified, 16 were deemed eligible for review. Three studies examined the efficacy and safety of BFRE, one study focused on efficacy results, and 12 studies investigated safety. Disease populations included spinal cord injury (SCI), inclusion body myositis (sIBM), multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's disease (PD), and stroke. A moderate-to-high risk of bias was presented in the quality assessment. Five studies reported safety concerns, including acutely elevated pain and rating of perceived exertion levels, severe fatigue, muscle soreness, and cases of autonomic dysreflexia. Two RCTs reported a significant between-group difference in physical function outcomes, and two RCTs reported neuromuscular adaptations.

CONCLUSION

BFRE seems to be a potentially safe and effective training modality in individuals with ND. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to limited quality and number of studies, small sample sizes, and a general lack of heterogeneity within and between the examined patient cohorts.

Acute Effect of Resistance Training With Blood Flow Restriction on Perceptual Responses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

Several studies have compared perceptual responses between resistance exercise with blood flow restriction and traditional resistance exercise (non-BFR). However, the results were contradictory.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the effect of RE+BFR versus non-BFR resistance exercise [low-load resistance exercise (LL-RE) or high-load resistance exercise (HL-RE)] on perceptual responses.

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PubMed®, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science were searched through August 28, 2021, and again on August 25, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies comparing the effect of RE+BFR versus non-BFR resistance exercise on rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and muscle pain/discomfort were considered. Meta-analyses were conducted using the random effects model.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2.

DATA EXTRACTION

All data were reviewed and extracted independently by 2 reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

Thirty studies were included in this review. In a fixed repetition scheme, the RPE [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.04; P < 0.01] and discomfort (SMD = 1.10; P < 0.01) were higher in RE+BFR than in non-BFR LL-RE, but similar in sets to voluntary failure. There were no significant differences in RPE in the comparisons between RE+BFR and non-BFR HL-RE; after sensitivity analyses, it was found that the RPE was higher in non-BFR HL-RE in a fixed repetition scheme. In sets to voluntary failure, discomfort was higher in RE+BFR versus non-BFR HL-RE (SMD = 0.95; P < 0. 01); however, in a fixed scheme, the results were similar.

CONCLUSION

In sets to voluntary failure, RPE is similar between RE+BFR and non-BFR exercise. In fixed repetition schemes, RE+BFR seems to promote higher RPE than non-BFR LL-RE and less than HL-RE. In sets to failure, discomfort appears to be similar between LL-RE with and without BFR; however, RE+BFR appears to promote greater discomfort than HL-RE. In fixed repetition schemes, the discomfort appears to be no different between RE+BFR and HL-RE, but is lower in non-BFR LL-RE.

Blood flow restriction as a potential therapy to restore physical function following COVID-19 infection

Accumulating evidence indicates that some COVID-19 survivors display reduced muscle mass, muscle strength, and aerobic capacity, which contribute to impairments in physical function that can persist for months after the acute phase of illness. Accordingly, strategies to restore muscle mass, muscle strength, and aerobic capacity following infection are critical to mitigate the long-term consequences of COVID-19. Blood flow restriction (BFR), which involves the application of mechanical compression to the limbs, presents a promising therapy that could be utilized throughout different phases of COVID-19 illness. Specifically, we hypothesize that: 1) use of passive BFR modalities can mitigate losses of muscle mass and muscle strength that occur during acute infection and 2) exercise with BFR can serve as an effective alternative to high-intensity exercise without BFR for regaining muscle mass, muscle strength, and aerobic capacity during convalescence. The various applications of BFR may also serve as a targeted therapy to address the underlying pathophysiology of COVID-19 and provide benefits to the musculoskeletal system as well as other organ systems affected by the disease. Consequently, we present a theoretical framework with which BFR could be implemented throughout the progression from acute illness to outpatient rehabilitation with the goal of improving short- and long-term outcomes in COVID-19 survivors. We envision that this paper will encourage discussion and consideration among researchers and clinicians of the potential therapeutic benefits of BFR to treat not only COVID-19 but similar pathologies and cases of acute critical illness.

Low-load blood flow-restricted resistance exercise produces fiber type-independent hypertrophy and improves muscle functional capacity in older individuals

Low-load blood flow-restricted resistance exercise (BFRRE) constitutes an effective means to produce skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Nonetheless, its applicability to counteract the age-related skeletal muscle decay at a cellular level, is not clear. Therefore, we investigated the effect of BFRRE on muscle fiber morphology, integrated muscle protein synthesis, muscle stem cells (MuSCs), myonuclear content, and muscle functional capacity in healthy older individuals. Twenty-three participants with a mean age of 66 yr (56-75 yr) were randomized to 6 wk of supervised BFRRE (3 sessions per week) or non-exercise control (CON). Biopsies were collected from the vastus lateralis before and after the intervention. Immunofluorescent microscopy was utilized to assess muscle fiber type-specific cross-sectional area (CSA) as well as MuSC and myonuclear content. Deuterium oxide was orally administered throughout the intervention period, enabling assessment of integrated myofibrillar and connective tissue protein fractional synthesis rate (FSR). BFRRE produced uniform ∼20% increases in the fiber CSA of both type I and type II fibers (P < 0.05). This occurred concomitantly with improvements in both maximal muscle strength and strength-endurance capacity but in the absence of increased MuSC content and myonuclear addition. The observed muscle fiber hypertrophy was not mirrored by increases in either myofibrillar or connective tissue FSR. In conclusion, BFRRE proved effective in stimulating skeletal muscle growth and increased muscle function in older individuals, which advocates for the use of BFRRE as a countermeasure of age-related deterioration of skeletal muscle mass and function.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We provide novel insight, that as little as 6 wk of low-load blood flow-restricted resistance exercise (BFRRE) produces pronounced fiber type-independent hypertrophy, alongside improvements across a broad range of muscle functional capacity in older individuals. Notably, since these results were obtained with a modest exercise volume and in a very time-efficient manner, BFRRE may represent a potent exercise strategy to counteract age-related muscle decay.

Investigating the autoregulation of applied blood flow restriction training pressures in healthy, physically active adults: an intervention study evaluating acute training responses and safety

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of autoregulated (AUTO) and non-autoregulated (NAUTO) blood flow restriction (BFR) application on adverse effects, performance, cardiovascular and perceptual responses during resistance exercise.

METHODS

Fifty-six healthy participants underwent AUTO and NAUTO BFR resistance exercise in a randomised crossover design using a training session with fixed amount of repetitions and a training session until volitional failure. Cardiovascular parameters, rate of perceived effort (RPE), rate of perceived discomfort (RPD) and number of repetitions were investigated after training, while the presence of delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) was verified 24 hours post-session. Adverse events during or following training were also monitored.

RESULTS

AUTO outperformed NAUTO in the failure protocol (p<0.001), while AUTO scored significantly lower for DOMS 24 hours after exercise (p<0.001). Perceptions of effort and discomfort were significantly higher in NAUTO compared with AUTO in both fixed (RPE: p=0.014, RPD: p<0.001) and failure protocol (RPE: p=0.028, RPD: p<0.001). Sixteen adverse events (7.14%) were recorded, with a sevenfold incidence in the fixed protocol for NAUTO compared with AUTO (NAUTO: n=7 vs AUTO: n=1) and five (NAUTO) vs three (AUTO) adverse events in the failure protocol. No significant differences in cardiovascular parameters were found comparing both pressure applications.

CONCLUSION

Autoregulation appears to enhance safety and performance in both fixed and failure BFR-training protocols. AUTO BFR training did not seem to affect cardiovascular stress differently, but was associated with lower DOMS, perceived effort and discomfort compared with NAUTO.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04996680.

Physiological adaptations and myocellular stress in short-term, high-frequency blood flow restriction training: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

High frequency (1-2 times per day) low-intensity blood flow restriction (BFR) training has been recommended as a prescription approach for short durations of time to maximize relevant physiological adaptations. However, some studies demonstrate negative physiological changes after short periods of high-frequency BFR training, including prolonged strength decline and muscle fiber atrophy.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive overview of short-term, high-frequency blood flow restriction training, including main adaptations, myocellular stress, limitations in the literature, and future perspectives.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases (Scopus, PubMed®, and Web of Science) was performed from the earliest record to April 23, 2022. Two independent reviewers selected experimental studies that analyzed physical training protocols (aerobic or resistance) of high weekly frequency (>4 days/week) and short durations (≤3 weeks).

RESULTS

In total, 22 studies were included in this review. The samples were composed exclusively of young predominantly male individuals. Muscle strength and hypertrophy were the main outcomes analyzed in the studies. In general, studies have demonstrated increases in strength and muscle size after short term (1-3 weeks), high-frequency low-intensity BFR training, non-failure, but not after control conditions (non-BFR; equalized training volume). Under failure conditions, some studies have demonstrated strength decline and muscle fiber atrophy after BFR conditions, accompanying increases in muscle damage markers. Significant limitations exist in the current HF-BFR literature due to large heterogeneities in methodologies.

CONCLUSION

The synthesis presented indicates that short-term, high-frequency BFR training programs can generate significant neuromuscular adaptations. However, in resistance training to failure, strength declines and muscle fiber atrophy were reported. Currently, there are no studies analyzing low-frequency vs. high-frequency in short-term BFR training. Comparisons between resistance exercises of similar intensities (e.g., combined effort) are lacking, limiting conclusions on whether the effect is a product of proximity to failure or a specific effect of BFR.

Effects of resistance training performed to repetition failure or non-failure on muscular strength and hypertrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of training to muscle failure or non-failure on muscular strength and hypertrophy.

METHODS

Meta-analyses of effect sizes (ESs) explored the effects of training to failure vs. non-failure on strength and hypertrophy. Subgroup meta-analyses explored potential moderating effects of variables such as training status (trained vs. untrained), training volume (volume equated vs. volume non-equated), body region (upper vs. lower), exercise selection (multi- vs. single-joint exercises (only for strength)), and study design (independent vs. dependent groups).

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included in the review. All studies included young adults as participants. Meta-analysis indicated no significant difference between the training conditions for muscular strength (ES = -0.09, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): -0.22 to 0.05) and for hypertrophy (ES = 0.22, 95%CI: -0.11 to 0.55). Subgroup analyses that stratified the studies according to body region, exercise selection, or study design showed no significant differences between training conditions. In studies that did not equate training volume between the groups, the analysis showed significant favoring of non-failure training on strength gains (ES = -0.32, 95%CI: -0.57 to -0.07). In the subgroup analysis for resistance-trained individuals, the analysis showed a significant effect of training to failure for muscle hypertrophy (ES = 0.15, 95%CI: 0.03-0.26).

CONCLUSION

Training to muscle failure does not seem to be required for gains in strength and muscle size. However, training in this manner does not seem to have detrimental effects on these adaptations, either. More studies should be conducted among older adults and highly trained individuals to improve the generalizability of these findings.

The Evolution of Blood Flow Restricted Exercise

The use of blood flow restricted (BFR) exercise has become an accepted alternative approach to improve skeletal muscle mass and function and improve cardiovascular function in individuals that are not able to or do not wish to use traditional exercise protocols that rely on heavy loads and high training volumes. BFR exercise involves the reduction of blood flow to working skeletal muscle by applying a flexible cuff to the most proximal portions of a person’s arms or legs that results in decreased arterial flow to the exercising muscle and occluded venous return back to the central circulation. Safety concerns, especially related to the cardiovascular system, have not been consistently reported with a few exceptions; however, most researchers agree that BFR exercise can be a relatively safe technique for most people that are free from serious cardiovascular disease, as well as those with coronary artery disease, and also for people suffering from chronic conditions, such as multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, and osteoarthritis. Potential mechanisms to explain the benefits of BFR exercise are still mostly speculative and may require more invasive studies or the use of animal models to fully explore mechanisms of adaptation. The setting of absolute resistive pressures has evolved, from being based on an individual’s systolic blood pressure to a relative measure that is based on various percentages of the pressures needed to totally occlude blood flow in the exercising limb. However, since several other issues remain unresolved, such as the actual external loads used in combination with BFR, the type of cuff used to induce the blood flow restriction, and whether the restriction is continuous or intermittent, this paper will attempt to address these additional concerns.

Eight weeks of resistance training with blood flow restriction improve cardiac function and vascular endothelial function in healthy young Asian males

Background

Resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) is a physiological ischaemic training method. Before it is applied to patients with coronary artery disease, it must be proven safe and effective.

Methods

Twenty-four healthy adult males were randomly assigned to three groups: the resistance training (RT) group, low-pressure BFR and resistance training (LP-RT) group and high-pressure BFR and resistance training (HP-RT) group. The training protocol was 20 times/min/set, with a 2-min break, five sets/day and 5 d/week for 8 weeks. Cardiac function, haemodynamics and vascular endothelial function were evaluated before and after the first training and the last training.

Results

There were no significant differences among groups before and after training. After 8 weeks of training, the resting heart rate (p<0.05) of the three groups significantly decreased (p<0.05). The rate–pressure product in the LP-RT group significantly decreased (p<0.05) compared with before training. Just after the last training, heart rate (p<0.05) and cardiac output (p<0.05) in the LP-RT and HP-RT groups significantly decreased compared with those just after the first training. At the end of the experiment, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF; p<0.01), soluble VEGF receptor (VEGFR) (p<0.05) and interleukin-6 (p<0.01) significantly increased, except for soluble VEGFR in the RT group.

Conclusions

Low-intensity resistance training with BFR moderately alters cardiac function. The expression levels of proteins related to vascular endothelial function have significantly changed. Both findings suggest that low-intensity resistance training with BFR may be safely and effectively applied to patients with coronary artery disease.

Acute changes in muscle thickness, edema, and blood flow are not different between low-load blood flow restriction and non-blood flow restriction

The purpose of the present study was to examine the acute changes in muscle swelling (as assessed by muscle thickness and echo intensity) and muscle blood flow associated with an acute bout of low-load blood flow restriction (LLBFR) and low-load non-blood flow restriction (LL) exercise. Twenty women (mean ± SD; 22 ± 2years) volunteered to perform an acute exercise bout that consisted of 75 (1 × 30, 3 × 15) isokinetic, reciprocal, concentric-only, submaximal (30% of peak torque), forearm flexion and extension muscle actions. Pretest, immediately after (posttest), and 5-min after (recovery) completing the 75 repetitions, muscle thickness and echo intensity were assessed from the biceps brachii and triceps brachii muscles and muscle blood flow was assessed from the brachial artery. There were no between group differences for any of the dependent variables, but there were significant simple and main effects for muscle and time. Biceps and triceps brachii muscle thickness increased from pretest (2.13 ± 0.39 cm and 1.88 ± 0.40 cm, respectively) to posttest (2.58 ± 0.49 cm and 2.17 ± 0.43 cm, respectively) for both muscles and remained elevated for the biceps brachii (2.53 ± 0.43 cm), but partially returned to pretest levels for the triceps brachii (2.06 ± 0.41 cm). Echo intensity and muscle blood flow increased from pretest (98.0 ± 13.6 Au and 94.5 ± 31.6 ml min^-1 , respectively) to posttest (109.2 ± 16.9 Au and 312.2 ± 106.5 ml min^-1 , respectively) and pretest to recovery (110.1 ± 18.3 Au and 206.7 ± 92.9 ml min^-1 , respectively) and remained elevated for echo intensity, but partially returned to pretest levels for muscle blood flow. The findings of the present study indicated that LLBFR and LL elicited comparable acute responses as a result of reciprocal, concentric-only, forearm flexion and extension muscle actions.

Perceived Barriers to Blood Flow Restriction Training

Blood flow restriction (BFR) training is increasing in popularity in the fitness and rehabilitation settings due to its role in optimizing muscle mass and strength as well as cardiovascular capacity, function, and a host of other benefits. However, despite the interest in this area of research, there are likely some perceived barriers that practitioners must overcome to effectively implement this modality into practice. These barriers include determining BFR training pressures, access to appropriate BFR training technologies for relevant demographics based on the current evidence, a comprehensive and systematic approach to medical screening for safe practice and strategies to mitigate excessive perceptual demands of BFR training to foster long-term compliance. This manuscript attempts to discuss each of these barriers and provides evidence-based strategies and direction to guide clinical practice and future research.

Similar Morphological and Functional Training Adaptations Occur Between Continuous and Intermittent Blood Flow Restriction

ABSTRACT

Davids, CJ, Raastad, T, James, L, Gajanand, T, Smith, E, Connick, M, McGorm, H, Keating, S, Coombes, JS, Peake, JM, and Roberts, LA. Similar morphological and functional training adaptations occur between continuous and intermittent blood flow restriction. J Strength Cond Res 35(7): 1784-1793, 2021-The aim of the study was to compare skeletal muscle morphological and functional outcomes after low-load resistance training using 2 differing blood flow restriction (BFR) protocols. Recreationally active men and women (n = 42 [f = 21], 24.4 ± 4.4 years) completed 21 sessions over 7 weeks of load-matched and volume-matched low-load resistance training (30% 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) with either (a) no BFR (CON), (b) continuous BFR (BFR-C, 60% arterial occlusion pressure [AOP]), or (c) intermittent BFR (BFR-I, 60% AOP). Muscle mass was assessed using peripheral quantitative computed tomography before and after training. Muscular strength, endurance, and power were determined before and after training by assessing isokinetic dynamometry, 1RM, and jump performance. Ratings of pain and effort were taken in the first and final training session. An alpha level of p < 0.05 was used to determine significance. There were no between-group differences for any of the morphological or functional variables. The muscle cross sectional area (CSA) increased pre-post training (p = 0.009; CON: 1.6%, BFR-C: 1.1%, BFR-I: 2.2%). Maximal isometric strength increased pre-post training (p < 0.001; CON: 9.6%, BFR-C: 14.3%, BFR-I: 19.3%). Total work performed during an isokinetic endurance task increased pre-post training (p < 0.001, CON: 3.6%, BFR-C: 9.6%, BFR-I: 11.3%). Perceptions of pain (p = 0.026) and effort (p = 0.033) during exercise were higher with BFR-C; however, these reduced with training (p = 0.005-0.034). Overall, these data suggest that when 30% 1RM loads are used with a frequency of 3 times per week, the addition of BFR does not confer superior morphological or functional adaptations in recreationally active individuals. Furthermore, the additional metabolic stress that is proposed to occur with a continuous BFR protocol does not seem to translate into proportionally greater training adaptations. The current findings promote the use of both intermittent BFR and low-load resistance training without BFR as suitable alternative training methods to continuous BFR. These approaches may be practically applicable for those less tolerable to pain and discomfort associated with ischemia during exercise.

Effects of low-load blood flow restriction exercise to failure and non-failure on myoelectric activity: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the short- and long-term effects of low load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) versus low- (LL-RT) or high-load (HL-RT) resistance training with free blood flow on myoelectric activity, and investigate the differences between failure and non-failure protocols.

DATA SOURCE

We identified sources by searching the MEDLINE/PUBMED, CINAHL, WEB OF SCIENCE, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, SPORTDiscus, and PEDro electronic databases.

STUDY SELECTION

We screened titles and abstracts of 1048 articles using our inclusion criteria. A total of 39 articles were selected for further analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of each study and extracted data from studies. A meta-analytic approach was used to compute standardized mean differences (SMD ± 95% confidence intervals (CI)). Subgroup analyses were conducted for both failure or non-failure protocols.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The search identified n = 39 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Regarding the short-term effects, LL-BFR increased muscle excitability compared with LL-RT during non-failure exercises (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.88), whereas HL-RT increased muscle excitability compared with LL-BFR regardless of voluntary failure (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -1.01 to 0.21) or not (SMD -1.13, CI -1.94 to -0.33). Concerning the long-term effects, LL-BFR increased muscle excitability compared with LL-RT during exercises performed to failure (SMD 1.09, CI 0.39 to 1.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Greater short-term muscle excitability levels are observed in LL-BFR than LL-RT during non-failure protocols. Conversely, greater muscle excitability is present during HL-RT compared with LL-BFR, regardless of volitional failure. Furthermore, LL-BFR performed to failure increases muscle excitability in the long-term compared with LL-RT.

Application and side effects of blood flow restriction technique: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of professionals

The physiological benefits of applying blood flow restriction (BFR) in isolation or in the presence of physical exercise have been widely documented in the scientific literature. Most investigations carried out under controlled laboratory conditions have found the technique to be safe. However, few studies have analyzed the use of the technique in clinical settings.To analyze how the BFR technique has been applied by professionals working in the clinical area and the prevalence of side effects (SEs) resulting from the use of this technique.This is a cross-sectional study. A total of 136 Brazilian professionals who perform some function related to physical rehabilitation, sports science, or physical conditioning participated in this study. Participants answered a self-administered online questionnaire consisting of 21 questions related to the professional profile and methodological aspects and SEs of the BFR technique.Professionals reported applying the BFR technique on individuals from different age groups from youth (≤18 years; 3.5%) to older adults (60-80 years; 30.7%), but mainly on people within the age group of 20 to 29 years (74.6%). A total of 99.1% of the professionals coupled the BFR technique with resistance exercise. Their main goals were muscle hypertrophy and physical rehabilitation. The majority (60.9%) of interviewees reported using BFR in durations of less than 5 minutes and the pressure used was mainly determined through the values of brachial blood pressure and arterial occlusion. Moreover, 92% of professionals declared observing at least 1 SE resulting from the BFR technique. Most professionals observed tingling (71.2%) and delayed onset of muscle soreness (55.8%). Rhabdomyolysis, fainting, and subcutaneous hemorrhaging were reported less frequently (1.9%, 3.8%, and 4.8%, respectively).Our findings indicate that the prescription of blood flow restriction technique results in minimal serious side effects when it is done in a proper clinical environment and follows the proposed recommendations found in relevant scientific literature.

Frequent blood flow restricted training not to failure and to failure induces similar gains in myonuclei and muscle mass

The purpose of the present study was to compare the effects of short-term high-frequency failure vs non-failure blood flow-restricted resistance exercise (BFRRE) on changes in satellite cells (SCs), myonuclei, muscle size, and strength. Seventeen untrained men performed four sets of BFRRE to failure (Failure) with one leg and not to failure (Non-failure; 30-15-15-15 repetitions) with the other leg using knee-extensions at 20% of one repetition maximum (1RM). Fourteen sessions were distributed over two 5-day blocks, separated by a 10-day rest period. Muscle samples obtained before, at mid-training, and 10-day post-intervention (Post10) were analyzed for muscle fiber area (MFA), myonuclei, and SC. Muscle size and echo intensity of m.rectus femoris (RF) and m.vastus lateralis (VL) were measured by ultrasonography, and knee extension strength with 1RM and maximal isometric contraction (MVC) up until Post24. Both protocols increased myonuclear numbers in type-1 (12%-17%) and type-2 fibers (20%-23%), and SC in type-1 (92%-134%) and type-2 fibers (23%-48%) at Post10 (p < 0.05). RF and VL size increased by 5%-10% in both legs at Post10 to Post24, whereas the MFA of type-1 fibers in Failure was decreased at Post10 (-10 ± 16%; p = 0.02). Echo intensity increased by ~20% in both legs during Block1 (p < 0.001) and was ~8 to 11% below baseline at Post24 (p = 0.001-0.002). MVC and 1RM decreased by 5%-10% after Block1, but increased in both legs by 6%-11% at Post24 (p < 0.05). In conclusion, both short-term high-frequency failure and non-failure BFRRE induced increases in SCs, in myonuclei content, muscle size, and strength, concomitant with decreased echo intensity. Intriguingly, the responses were delayed and peaked 10-24 days after the training intervention. Our findings may shed light on the mechanisms involved in resistance exercise-induced overreaching and supercompensation.

Exercise-induced fluid shifts are distinct to exercise mode and intensity: a comparison of blood flow-restricted and free-flow resistance exercise

MRI can provide fundamental tools in decoding physiological stressors stimulated by training paradigms. Acute physiological changes induced by three diverse exercise protocols known to elicit similar levels of muscle hypertrophy were evaluated using muscle functional magnetic resonance imaging (mfMRI). The study was a cross-over study with participants (n = 10) performing three acute unilateral knee extensor exercise protocols to failure and a work matched control exercise protocol. Participants were scanned after each exercise protocol; 70% 1 repetition maximum (RM) (FF70); 20% 1RM (FF20); 20% 1RM with blood flow restriction (BFR20); free-flow (FF) control work matched to BFR20 (FF20_WM). Post exercise mfMRI scans were used to obtain interleaved measures of muscle R2 (indicator of edema), R2' (indicator of deoxyhemoglobin), muscle cross sectional area (CSA) blood flow, and diffusion. Both BFR20 and FF20 exercise resulted in a larger acute decrease in R2, decrease in R2', and expansion of the extracellular compartment with slower rates of recovery. BFR20 caused greater acute increases in muscle CSA than FF20_WM and FF70. Only BFR20 caused acute increases in intracellular volume. Postexercise muscle blood flow was higher after FF70 and FF20 exercise than BFR20. Acute changes in mean diffusivity were similar across all exercise protocols. This study was able to differentiate the acute physiological responses between anabolic exercise protocols. Low-load exercise protocols, known to have relatively higher energy contributions from glycolysis at task failure, elicited a higher mfMRI response. Noninvasive mfMRI represents a promising tool for decoding mechanisms of anabolic adaptation in muscle.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Using muscle functional MRI (mfMRI), this study was able to differentiate the acute physiological responses following three established hypertrophic resistance exercise strategies. Low-load exercise protocols performed to failure, with or without blood flow restriction, resulted in larger changes in R₂ (i.e. greater T₂-shifts) with a slow rate of return to baseline indicative of myocellular fluid shifts. These data were cross evaluated with interleaved measures of macrovascular blood flow, water diffusion, muscle cross sectional area (i.e. acute macroscopic muscle swelling), and intracellular water fraction measured using MRI.

Physiological responses of human skeletal muscle to acute blood flow restricted exercise assessed by multimodal MRI

Important physiological quantities for investigating muscle hypertrophy include blood oxygenation, cell swelling, and changes in blood flow. The purpose of this study was to compare the acute changes of these parameters in human skeletal muscle induced by low-load (20% 1-RM) blood flow-restricted (BFR-20) knee extensor exercise compared with free-flow work-matched (FF-20_WM) and free-flow 50% 1-RM (FF-50) knee extensor exercise using multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Subjects (n = 11) completed acute exercise sessions for each exercise mode in an MRI scanner, where interleaved measures of muscle R₂ (indicator of edema), [Formula: see text] (indicator of deoxyhemoglobin), macrovascular blood flow, and diffusion were performed before, between sets, and after the final set for each exercise protocol. BFR-20 exercise resulted in larger acute decreases in R₂ and greater increases in cross-sectional area than FF-20_WM and FF-50 (P < 0.01). Blood oxygenation decreased between sets during BFR-20, as indicated by a 13.6% increase in [Formula: see text] values (P < 0.01)), whereas they remained unchanged for FF-20_WM and decreased during FF-50 exercise. Quadriceps blood flow between sets was highest for the heavier load (FF-50), averaging 305 mL/min, and lowest for BFR-20 at 123 ± 73 mL/min until post-exercise cuff release, where blood flow rates in BFR-20 exceeded both FF protocols (P < 0.01). Acute changes in diffusion rates were similar for all exercise protocols. This study was able to differentiate the acute exercise response of selected physiological factors associated with skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Marked differences in these parameters were found to exist between BFR and FF exercise conditions, which contribute to explain the anabolic potential of low-load blood flow restricted muscle exercise.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Acute changes in blood flow, diffusion, blood oxygenation, cross-sectional area, and the "T₂ shift" are evaluated in human skeletal muscle in response to blood flow-restricted (BFR) and conventional free-flow knee extensor exercise performed in an MRI scanner. The acute physiological response to exercise was dependent on the magnitude of load and the application of BFR. Physiological variables changed markedly and established a steady state rapidly after the first of four exercise sets.

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.

Muscle fibre activation and fatigue with low-load blood flow restricted resistance exercise-An integrative physiology review

Blood flow-restricted resistance exercise (BFRRE) has been shown to induce increases in muscle size and strength, and continues to generate interest from both clinical and basic research points of view. The low loads employed, typically 20%-50% of the one repetition maximum, make BFRRE an attractive training modality for individuals who may not tolerate high musculoskeletal forces (eg, selected clinical patient groups such as frail old adults and patients recovering from sports injury) and/or for highly trained athletes who have reached a plateau in muscle mass and strength. It has been proposed that achieving a high degree of muscle fibre recruitment is important for inducing muscle hypertrophy with BFRRE, and the available evidence suggest that fatiguing low-load exercise during ischemic conditions can recruit both slow (type I) and fast (type II) muscle fibres. Nevertheless, closer scrutiny reveals that type II fibre activation in BFRRE has to date largely been inferred using indirect methods such as electromyography and magnetic resonance spectroscopy, while only rarely addressed using more direct methods such as measurements of glycogen stores and phosphocreatine levels in muscle fibres. Hence, considerable uncertainity exists about the specific pattern of muscle fibre activation during BFRRE. Therefore, the purpose of this narrative review was (1) to summarize the evidence on muscle fibre recruitment during BFRRE as revealed by various methods employed for determining muscle fibre usage during exercise, and (2) to discuss reported findings in light of the specific advantages and limitations associated with these methods.

Effect of Blood Flow Restricted Resistance Exercise and Remote Ischemic Conditioning on Functional Capacity and Myocellular Adaptations in Patients With Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) have impaired functional capacity and inferior quality of life. The clinical manifestations are associated with structural and functional impairments in skeletal muscle, emphasizing a need for feasible rehabilitation strategies beyond optimal anticongestive medical treatment. We investigated whether low-load blood flow restricted resistance exercise (BFRRE) or remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) could improve functional capacity and quality of life in patients with CHF and stimulate skeletal muscle myofibrillar and mitochondrial adaptations.

METHODS

We randomized 36 patients with CHF to BFRRE, RIC, or nontreatment control. BFRRE and RIC were performed 3× per week for 6 weeks. Before and after intervention, muscle biopsies, tests of functional capacity, and quality of life assessments were performed. Deuterium oxide was administered throughout the intervention to measure cumulative RNA and subfraction protein synthesis. Changes in muscle fiber morphology and mitochondrial respiratory function were also assessed.

RESULTS

BFRRE improved 6-minute walk test by 39.0 m (CI, 7.0-71.1, P=0.019) compared with control. BFRRE increased maximum isometric strength by 29.7 Nm (CI, 10.8-48.6, P=0.003) compared with control. BFRRE improved quality of life by 5.4 points (CI, -0.04 to 10.9; P=0.052) compared with control. BFRRE increased mitochondrial function by 19.1 pmol/s per milligram (CI, 7.3-30.8; P=0.002) compared with control. RIC did not produce similar changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that BFRRE, but not RIC, improves functional capacity, quality of life, and muscle mitochondrial function. Our findings have clinical implications for rehabilitation of patients with CHF and provide new insights on the myopathy accompanying CHF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03380663.

Differential muscle hypertrophy and edema responses between high-load and low-load exercise with blood flow restriction

We sought to determine whether early increases in cross-sectional area (CSA) of different muscles composing the quadriceps with low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) were mainly driven by muscle hypertrophy or by edema-induced swelling. We also compared these changes to those promoted by high-load resistance training (HL-RT). In a randomized within-subject design, fifteen healthy, untrained men were submitted to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for CSA and edema-induced muscle swelling assessment (fast spin echo inversion recovery, FSE-STIR). MRI was performed in LL-BFR and HL-RT at baseline (W0) and after 3 weeks (W3), with a further measure after 6 weeks (W6) for HL-RT. Participants were also assessed at these time points for indirect muscle damage markers (range of motion, ROM; muscle soreness, SOR). CSA significantly increased for all the quadriceps muscles, for both LL-BFR and HL-RT at W3 (all P < .05) compared to W0. However, FSE-STIR was elevated at W3 for all the quadriceps muscles only for HL-RT (all P < .0001), not LL-BFR (all P > .05). Significant increases and decreases were shown in SOR and ROM, respectively, for HL-RT in W3 compared to W0 (both P < .05), while these changes were mitigated at W6 compared to W0 (both P > .05). No significant changes in SOR or ROM were demonstrated for LL-BFR across the study. Early increases in CSA with LL-BFR seem to occur without the presence of muscle edema, whereas initial gains obtained by HL-RT were influenced by muscle edema, in addition to muscle hypertrophy.

Six Weeks of Low-Load Blood Flow Restricted and High-Load Resistance Exercise Training Produce Similar Increases in Cumulative Myofibrillar Protein Synthesis and Ribosomal Biogenesis in Healthy Males

Purpose: High-load resistance exercise contributes to maintenance of muscle mass, muscle protein quality, and contractile function by stimulation of muscle protein synthesis (MPS), hypertrophy, and strength gains. However, high loading may not be feasible in several clinical populations. Low-load blood flow restricted resistance exercise (BFRRE) may provide an alternative approach. However, the long-term protein synthetic response to BFRRE is unknown and the myocellular adaptations to prolonged BFRRE are not well described. Methods: To investigate this, 34 healthy young subjects were randomized to 6 weeks of low-load BFRRE, HLRE, or non-exercise control (CON). Deuterium oxide (D2O) was orally administered throughout the intervention period. Muscle biopsies from m. vastus lateralis were collected before and after the 6-week intervention period to assess long-term myofibrillar MPS and RNA synthesis as well as muscle fiber-type-specific cross-sectional area (CSA), satellite cell content, and myonuclei content. Muscle biopsies were also collected in the immediate hours following single-bout exercise to assess signaling for muscle protein degradation. Isometric and dynamic quadriceps muscle strength was evaluated before and after the intervention. Results: Myofibrillar MPS was higher in BFRRE (1.34%/day, p < 0.01) and HLRE (1.12%/day, p < 0.05) compared to CON (0.96%/day) with no significant differences between exercise groups. Muscle RNA synthesis was higher in BFRRE (0.65%/day, p < 0.001) and HLRE (0.55%/day, p < 0.01) compared to CON (0.38%/day) and both training groups increased RNA content, indicating ribosomal biogenesis in response to exercise. BFRRE and HLRE both activated muscle degradation signaling. Muscle strength increased 6-10% in BFRRE (p < 0.05) and 13-23% in HLRE (p < 0.01). Dynamic muscle strength increased to a greater extent in HLRE (p < 0.05). No changes in type I and type II muscle fiber-type-specific CSA, satellite cell content, or myonuclei content were observed. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that BFRRE increases long-term muscle protein turnover, ribosomal biogenesis, and muscle strength to a similar degree as HLRE. These findings emphasize the potential application of low-load BFRRE to stimulate muscle protein turnover and increase muscle function in clinical populations where high loading is untenable.