Physiological Adaptations to High-Intensity Interval Training Combined with Blood Flow Restriction in Masters Road Cyclists

Effects of blood flow restriction training in athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effects of blood flow restriction training on strength and aerobic capacity in athletes, examining how training variables and participant characteristics influenced outcomes. Four databases were searched for peer-reviewed English-language studies, and the risk of bias and the quality of evidence were assessed using RoB 2 and GRADEpro GDT. We evaluated pre- and post-test differences by a three-level meta-analysis using meta and metafor packages. Subgroup analyses and both linear and nonlinear meta-regression methods were used to explore moderating factors. Sixteen studies with "some concerns," the risk of bias and low evidence level, were included. Combining blood flow restriction with low-intensity resistance training produced an effect size of 0.25 for strength, while combining blood flow restriction with aerobic training had an effect size of 0.42. For aerobic capacity, the effect size of combining blood flow restriction with aerobic training was 0.58. Subgroup and regression analyses showed no significant differences. While blood flow restriction with low-intensity resistance training enhances strength, it does not result in additional gains. Combining blood flow restriction with aerobic training enhances both the strength and the aerobic capacity. Overall, blood flow restriction appears to offer the most benefits for male athletes in improving the strength and aerobic capacity.

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.

Physiological adaptations and performance enhancement with combined blood flow restricted and interval training: A systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine: (a) the chronic effects of interval training (IT) combined with blood flow restriction (BFR) on physiological adaptations (aerobic/anaerobic capacity and muscle responses) and performance enhancement (endurance and sprints), and (b) the influence of participant characteristics and intervention protocols on these effects.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science (Core Collection), Cochrane Library (Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure on April 2, with updates on October 17, 2024. Pooled effects for each outcome were summarized using Hedge's g (g) through meta-analysis-based random effects models, and subgroup and regression analyses were used to explore moderators.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies with 621 participants were included. IT combined with BFR (IT+BFR) significantly improved maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) (g = 0.63, I2 = 63%), mean power during the Wingate 30-s test (g = 0.70, I2 = 47%), muscle strength (g = 0.88, I2 = 64%), muscle endurance (g = 0.43, I2 = 0%), time to fatigue (g = 1.26, I2 = 86%), and maximal aerobic speed (g = 0.74, I2 = 0%) compared to IT alone. Subgroup analysis indicated that participant characteristics including training status, IT intensity, and IT modes significantly moderated VO2max (subgroup differences: p < 0.05). Specifically, IT+BFR showed significantly superior improvements in VO2max compared to IT alone in trained individuals (g = 0.76) at supra-maximal intensity (g = 1.29) and moderate intensity (g = 1.08) as well as in walking (g = 1.64) and running (g = 0.63) modes. Meta-regression analysis showed cuff width (β = 0.14) was significantly associated with VO2max change, identifying 8.23 cm as the minimum threshold required for significant improvement. Subgroup analyses regarding muscle strength did not reveal any significant moderators.

CONCLUSION

IT+BFR enhances physiological adaptations and optimizes aspects of endurance performance, with moderators including training status, IT protocol (intensity, mode, and type), and cuff width. This intervention addresses various IT-related challenges and provides tailored protocols and benefits for diverse populations.

Blood Flow Restriction during Walking Does Not Impact Body Composition or Performance Measures in Highly Trained Runners

Blood flow restriction (BFR) is a commonly used training modality that has been demonstrated to enhance muscle characteristics such as size and function. The purpose of this study was to determine if a 4-week walking program with or without BFR in healthy, active adults has an effect on body composition, anaerobic, and aerobic running performance. Thirty-three participants, randomized among three groups, completed the walking program, which included five sets of 2 min walking intervals with 1 min rest, with or without BFR, or 10 min walking with BFR. Assessments completed before and after the walking program included body composition, 40-yard sprints, and a VO2MAX test on a treadmill. A two-way ANOVA revealed no changes among the groups nor for any variables at any time (p > 0.05). Additionally, one main effect for time indicated the VO2 at V-slope threshold was greater following training for all groups combined (p = 0.001). The results demonstrate that low volume and intensity walking with BFR for 4 weeks did not provide a sufficient stimulus for changing body composition or performance metrics in a group of very active adults. Longer or more isolated exposure of BFR on the limbs may contribute to more pronounced adaptations.

Effects of Omega-3 Fatty Acids on Flow-mediated Dilatation and Carotid Intima Media Thickness: A Meta-analysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To investigate the effects of omega-3 fatty acids on flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) and carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and explore the factors influencing these effects.

RECENT FINDINGS

FMD was significantly higher in the omega-3 fatty acid group compared to the control group (mean difference = 0.90%; p = 0.0003). In particular, the subgroup with CHD (both EPA + DHA < 1 g/day and ≥ 1 g/day) and the subgroup without CHD but with CHD risk factors (only EPA + DHA ≥ 1 g/day) showed significantly increased FMD after supplementation of omega-3 fatty acids. CIMT was not significantly different between the omega-3 fatty acid and control groups (standardized mean difference = -0.08; p = 0.26). Subgroup analysis of CHD patients was not conducted because of the limited number of studies. Intake of omega-3 fatty acids improved FMD in patients with CHD and patients with risk factors for CHD. Further research is needed on the effects of omega-3 fatty acids on CIMT.

Impact of Blood-Flow-Restricted Training on Arterial Functions and Angiogenesis-A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Despite growing evidence of the significant influence of blood-flow-restricted (BFR) training on different body functions, its impact on the vascular system, especially the arteries, is controversial. Therefore, the objective of our study was to analyze how BFR exercise, compared to other types of exercise without the restriction of blood flow, influences arterial functions and angiogenesis in adults. Studies comparing the effect of BFR versus non-BFR training on arterial parameters were divided into three categories: endothelial function, angiogenesis, and other vasculature functions. The search was based on Cochrane Library, PubMed®, and Embase, and 38 studies were included. The meta-analysis revealed a more significant improvement in flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) (p = 0.002) and the production of the primary angiogenesis biomarker vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) (p = 0.009) after BFR compared to non-BFR training (p = 0.002). The analysis of the pulse wave velocity, ankle-brachial index, systolic blood pressure, and heart rate did not show significant differences in changes between BFR and non-BFR training. The other parameters examined did not have sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. The results obtained present trends that suggest significant impacts of BFR training on endothelial functions and angiogenesis. There is still a lack of multicenter randomized clinical trials including many participants, and such studies are necessary to confirm the advantage of BFR over non-BFR activity.

A Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo Control Study on the Effect of a Blood Flow Restriction by an Inflatable Cuff Worn around the Arm on the Wrist Joint Position Sense in Healthy Recreational Athletes

The number of blood flow restriction (BFR) training practitioners is rapidly increasing, so understanding the safety issues associated with limb occlusion is strongly needed. The present study determined the effect of BFR by an inflatable cuff worn around the arm on the wrist joint position sense (JPS) in healthy recreational athletes. In the prospective randomized, double-blind placebo control study, sixty healthy right-handed recreational athletes aged x = 22.93 ± 1.26 years were assigned to groups of equal size and gender rates: BFR, placebo, and control. The active wrist JPS was assessed in two separate sessions using an isokinetic dynamometer. The first assessment was performed with no cuffs. In the second session, a cuff with a standardized pressure was worn on the examined limb in the BFR group. In the placebo group, the cuff was uninflated. A between-session comparison in each group of collected angular errors expressed in degrees was carried out. The angular error in the BFR group was larger during the second measurement than the first one (p = 0.011-0.336). On the contrary, in the placebo (p = 0.241-0.948) and control (p = 0.093-0.904) groups, the error value in the second session was comparable or smaller. It was determined that BFR by an inflatable cuff around the arm impairs the wrist position sense. Hence, BFR training should be performed with caution.

Acute effect of high-intensity interval exercise on vascular endothelial function and possible mechanisms of wall shear stress in young obese males

Objective: To investigate the mechanisms of wall shear stress (WSS) responsible for the effects of high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE) on vascular endothelial function in young obese males.

Methods: A within-subject study design was used. We examined the response of the reactive hyperemia index (RHI) to acute HIIE in young obese males (n = 20, age = 20.38 ± 1.40 years, body mass index [BMI] = 31.22 ± 3.57, body fat percentage [BF (%)] = 31.76 ± 3.57). WSS was manipulated using 100, 80, or 60 mmHg cuff inflation during the HIIE to determine the proper inflation capable of maintaining WSS near baseline levels. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance and LSD post hoc tests were performed to compare changes in WSS and vascular endothelial function at baseline HIIE and following HIIE using different cuff inflations.

Results: There were no significant differences in RHI and WSS between the three cuff inflation values (p > 0.05). WSS was significantly higher in obese male individuals after HIIE and HIIE with 100 mmHg cuff inflation (p = 0.018, p = 0.005) than that at baseline, with no significant differences observed comparing HIIE and HIIE with 100 mmHg inflation (p = 0.23). The RHI after HIIE was significantly higher (p = 0.012) than that at baseline, while no significant differences were detected after HIIE at 100 mmHg (p = 0.91). The RHI was significantly lower after HIIE with 100 mmHg than that after HIIE (p = 0.007). WSS (p = 0.004) and RHI (p = 0.017) were significantly higher after HIIE than that at baseline, while no significant differences were observed after HIIE with either 80 or 60 mmHg cuff inflation (baseline vs. HIIE + 80 mmHg: WSS: p = 0.33, RHI: p = 0.38; baseline vs. HIIE + 60 mmHg: WSS: p = 0.58, RHI: p = 0.45). WSS was similar to HIIE, after HIIE with either 80 or 60 mmHg inflation (p = 0.36, p = 0.40). However, RHI was significantly higher for HIIE than for HIIE with both 80 and 60 mmHg inflation (p = 0.011, p = 0.006).

Conclusion: HIIE could significantly improve WSS and vascular endothelial function. HIIE intervention with 60 or 80 mmHg inflation might enhance WSS near the baseline level. HIIE-induced acute changes in WSS may provide the primary physiological stimulus for vascular endothelial adaptation to HIIE in young obese males.

A narrative review of the effects of blood flow restriction on vascular structure and function

Blood flow restriction is growing in popularity as a tool for increasing muscular size and strength. Currently, guidelines exist for using blood flow restriction alone and in combination with endurance and resistance exercise. However, only about 1.3% of practitioners familiar with blood flow restriction applications have utilized it for vascular changes, suggesting many of the guidelines are based on skeletal muscle outcomes. Thus, this narrative review is intended to explore the literature available in which blood flow restriction, or a similar application, assess the changes in vascular structure or function. Based on the literature, there is a knowledge gap in how applying blood flow restriction with relative pressures may alter the vasculature when applied alone, with endurance exercise, and with resistance exercise. In many instances, the application of blood flow restriction was not in accordance with the current guidelines, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions as to how the vascular system would be affected. Additionally, several studies report no change in vascular structure or function, but few studies look at variables for both outcomes. By examining outcomes for both structure and function, investigators would be able to generate recommendations for the use of blood flow restriction to improve vascular structure and/or function in the future.