-
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aug 2018Exercise is one of the most important components in frailty prevention and treatment. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the effect of resistance training (RT) alone... (Review)
Review
AIM
Exercise is one of the most important components in frailty prevention and treatment. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the effect of resistance training (RT) alone or combined with multimodal exercise intervention on muscle hypertrophy, maximal strength, power output, functional performance, and falls incidence in physically frail elderly.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched from 2005 to 2017. Studies must have mentioned the effects of RT (i.e., included or not in multimodal training) on at least one of the following parameters: muscle mass, muscle strength, muscle power, functional capacity, and risk of falls in frail elderly.
RESULTS
The initial search identified 371 studies and 16 were used for qualitative analysis for describing the effect of strength training performed alone or in a multimodal exercise intervention. We observed that RT alone or in a multimodal training may induce increases of 6.6-37% in maximal strength; 3.4-7.5% in muscle mass, 8.2% in muscle power, 4.7-58.1% in functional capacity and risk of falls, although some studies did not show enhancements.
CONCLUSION
Frequency of 1-6 sessions per week, training volume of 1-3 sets of 6-15 repetitions and intensity of 30-70%1-RM promoted significant enhancements on muscle strength, muscle power, and functional outcomes. Therefore, in agreement with previous studies, we suggest that supervised and controlled RT represents an effective intervention in frailty treatment.
Topics: Accidental Falls; Aged; Exercise; Frail Elderly; Humans; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training
PubMed: 29188577
DOI: 10.1007/s40520-017-0863-z -
Journal of Human Kinetics Aug 2019Beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate (HMB) has been used extensively as a dietary supplement for athletes and physically active people. HMB is a leucine metabolite, which is...
Beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate (HMB) has been used extensively as a dietary supplement for athletes and physically active people. HMB is a leucine metabolite, which is one of three branched chain amino acids. HMB plays multiple roles in the human body of which most important ones include protein metabolism, insulin activity and skeletal muscle hypertrophy. The ergogenic effects of HMB supplementation are related to the enhancement of sarcolemma integrity, inhibition of protein degradation (ubiquitin pathway), decreased cell apoptosis, increased protein synthesis (mTOR pathway), stimulation of the growth hormone/insulin-like growth factor-1 (GH/IGF-1) axis and enhancement of muscle stem cells proliferation and differentiation. HMB supplementation has been carried out with various groups of athletes. In endurance and martial arts athletes, HMB supplementation revealed positive effects on specific aerobic capacity variables. Positive results were also disclosed in resistance trained athletes, where changes in strength, body fat and muscle mass as well as anaerobic performance and power output were observed. The purpose of this review was to present the main mechanisms of HMB action, especially related to muscle protein synthesis and degradation, and ergogenic effects on different types of sports and physical activities.
PubMed: 31531146
DOI: 10.2478/hukin-2019-0070 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Mar 2020Low-load blood flow restriction (BFR) training has attracted attention as a potentially effective method of perioperative clinical rehabilitation for patients undergoing... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Low-load blood flow restriction (BFR) training has attracted attention as a potentially effective method of perioperative clinical rehabilitation for patients undergoing orthopaedic procedures.
PURPOSE
To (1) compare the effectiveness of low-load BFR training in conjunction with a standard rehabilitation protocol, pre- and postoperatively, and non-BFR interventions in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and (2) evaluate protocols for implementing BFR perioperatively for patients undergoing ACLR.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2.
METHODS
A systematic review of the 3 medical literature databases was conducted to identify all level 1 and 2 clinical trials published since 1990 on BFR in patients undergoing ACLR. Patient demographics from included studies were pooled. Outcome data were documented, including muscle strength and size, and perceived pain and exertion. A descriptive analysis of outcomes from BFR and non-BFR interventions was performed.
RESULTS
A total of 6 studies (154 patients; 66.2% male; mean ± SD age, 24.2 ± 3.68 years) were included. Of these, 2 studies examined low-load BFR as a preoperative intervention, 1 of which observed a significant increase in muscle isometric endurance ( = .014), surface electromyography of the vastus medialis ( < .001), and muscle blood flow to the vastus lateralis at final follow-up ( < .001) as compared with patients undergoing sham BFR. Four studies investigated low-load BFR as a postoperative intervention, and they observed significant benefits in muscle hypertrophy, as measured by cross-sectional area; strength, as measured by extensor torque; and subjective outcomes, as measured by subjective knee pain during session, over traditional low-load resistance training (all < .05). BFR occlusion periods ranged from 3 to 5 minutes, with rest periods ranging from 45 seconds to 3 minutes.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review found evidence on the topic of BFR rehabilitation after ACLR to be sparse and heterogeneous likely because of the relatively recent onset of its popularity. While a few authors have demonstrated the potential strength and hypertrophy benefits of perioperative BFR, future investigations with standardized outcomes, long-term follow-up, and more robust sample sizes are required to draw more definitive conclusions.
PubMed: 32232065
DOI: 10.1177/2325967120906822 -
PloS One 2021Rheumatoid arthritis(RA) and osteoarthritis(OA) patients showed systemic manifestations that may lead to a reduction in muscle strength, muscle mass and, consequently,...
The effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction on muscle strength, muscle hypertrophy and functionality in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Rheumatoid arthritis(RA) and osteoarthritis(OA) patients showed systemic manifestations that may lead to a reduction in muscle strength, muscle mass and, consequently, to a reduction in functionality. On the other hand, moderate intensity resistance training(MIRT) and high intensity resistance training(HIRT) are able to improve muscle strength and muscle mass in RA and OA without affecting the disease course. However, due to the articular manifestations caused by these diseases, these patients may present intolerance to MIRT or HIRT. Thus, the low intensity resistance training combined with blood flow restriction(LIRTBFR) may be a new training strategy for these populations.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to verify the effects of LIRTBFR on muscle strength, muscle mass and functionality in RA and OA patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials(RCTs), published in English, between 1957-2021, was conducted using MEDLINE(PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library. The methodological quality was assessed using Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. The risk of bias was assessed using RoB2.0. Mean difference(MD) or standardized mean difference(SMD) and 95% confidence intervals(CI) were pooled using a random-effects model. A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
Five RCTs were included. We found no significant differences in the effects between LIRTBFR, MIRT and HIRT on muscle strength, which was assessed by tests of quadriceps strength(SMD = -0.01[-0.57, 0.54], P = 0.96; I² = 58%) and functionality measured by tests with patterns similar to walking(SMD = -0.04[-0.39, 0.31], P = 0.82; I² = 0%). Compared to HIRT, muscle mass gain after LIRTBFR was reported to be similar. When comparing LIRTBFR with low intensity resistance training without blood flow restriction(LIRT), the effect LIRTBFR was reported to be higher on muscle strength, which was evaluated by the knee extension test.
CONCLUSION
LIRTBFR appears to be a promising strategy for gains in muscle strength, muscle mass and functionality in a predominant sample of RA and OA women.
Topics: Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Blood Flow Restriction Therapy; Hemodynamics; Humans; Hypertrophy; Muscle Strength; Resistance Training
PubMed: 34758045
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259574 -
American Journal of Physiology. Renal... Dec 2016Insulin resistance (IR) is an early metabolic alteration in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, being apparent when the glomerular filtration rate is still within the... (Review)
Review
Insulin resistance (IR) is an early metabolic alteration in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, being apparent when the glomerular filtration rate is still within the normal range and becoming almost universal in those who reach the end stage of kidney failure. The skeletal muscle represents the primary site of IR in CKD, and alterations at sites beyond the insulin receptor are recognized as the main defect underlying IR in this condition. Estimates of IR based on fasting insulin concentration are easier and faster but may not be adequate in patients with CKD because renal insufficiency reduces insulin catabolism. The hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp is the gold standard for the assessment of insulin sensitivity because this technique allows a direct measure of skeletal muscle sensitivity to insulin. The etiology of IR in CKD is multifactorial in nature and may be secondary to disturbances that are prominent in renal diseases, including physical inactivity, chronic inflammation, oxidative stress, vitamin D deficiency, metabolic acidosis, anemia, adipokine derangement, and altered gut microbiome. IR contributes to the progression of renal disease by worsening renal hemodynamics by various mechanisms, including activation of the sympathetic nervous system, sodium retention, and downregulation of the natriuretic peptide system. IR has been solidly associated with intermediate mechanisms leading to cardiovascular (CV) disease in CKD including left ventricular hypertrophy, vascular dysfunction, and atherosclerosis. However, it remains unclear whether IR is an independent predictor of mortality and CV complications in CKD. Because IR is a modifiable risk factor and its reduction may lower CV morbidity and mortality, unveiling the molecular mechanisms responsible for the pathogenesis of CKD-related insulin resistance is of importance for the identification of novel therapeutic targets aimed at reducing the high CV risk of this condition.
Topics: Disease Progression; Glucose Clamp Technique; Humans; Inflammation; Insulin Resistance; Oxidative Stress; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Vitamin D Deficiency
PubMed: 27707707
DOI: 10.1152/ajprenal.00340.2016 -
Journal of Strength and Conditioning... Apr 2021Vieira, AF, Umpierre, D, Teodoro, JL, Lisboa, SC, Baroni, BM, Izquierdo, M, and Cadore, EL. Effects of resistance training performed to failure or not to failure on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Vieira, AF, Umpierre, D, Teodoro, JL, Lisboa, SC, Baroni, BM, Izquierdo, M, and Cadore, EL. Effects of resistance training performed to failure or not to failure on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and power output: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 35(4): 1165-1175, 2021-The aim of this review was to summarize the evidence from longitudinal studies assessing the effects induced by resistance training (RT) performed to failure (RTF) vs. not to failure (RTNF) on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and power output in adults. Three electronic databases were searched using terms related to RTF and RTNF. Studies were eligible if they met the following criteria: randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing the effects of RTF vs. RTNF on muscle hypertrophy, maximal strength, and muscle power in adults, and RT intervention ≥6 weeks. Results were presented as standardized mean differences (SMDs) between treatments with 95% confidence intervals, and calculations were performed using random effects models. Significance was accepted when p < 0.05. Thirteen studies were included in this review. No difference was found between RTF and RTNF on maximal strength in overall analysis (SMD: -0.08; p = 0.642), but greater strength increase was observed in RTNF considering nonequalized volumes (SMD: -0.34; p = 0.048). Resistance training performed to failure showed a greater increase in muscle hypertrophy than RTNF (SMD: 0.75; p = 0.005), whereas no difference was observed considering equalized RT volumes. No difference was found between RTF and RTNF on muscle power considering overall analysis (SMD: -0.20; p = 0.239), whereas greater improvement was observed in RTNF considering nonequalized RT volumes (SMD: -0.61; p = 0.025). Resistance training not to failure may induce comparable or even greater improvements in maximal dynamic strength and power output, whereas no difference between RTF vs. RTNF is observed on muscle hypertrophy, considering equalized RT volumes.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Hypertrophy; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training
PubMed: 33555822
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003936 -
Pharmacology & Therapeutics Apr 2019Atherosclerosis, the principal cause of cardiovascular death worldwide, is a pathological disease characterized by fibro-proliferation, chronic inflammation, lipid...
Atherosclerosis, the principal cause of cardiovascular death worldwide, is a pathological disease characterized by fibro-proliferation, chronic inflammation, lipid accumulation, and immune disorder in the vessel wall. As the atheromatous plaques develop into advanced stage, the vulnerable plaques are prone to rupture, which causes acute cardiovascular events, including ischemic stroke and myocardial infarction. Emerging evidence has suggested that atherosclerosis is also an epigenetic disease with the interplay of multiple epigenetic mechanisms. The epigenetic basis of atherosclerosis has transformed our knowledge of epigenetics from an important biological phenomenon to a burgeoning field in cardiovascular research. Here, we provide a systematic and up-to-date overview of the current knowledge of three distinct but interrelated epigenetic processes (including DNA methylation, histone methylation/acetylation, and non-coding RNAs), in atherosclerotic plaque development and instability. Mechanistic and conceptual advances in understanding the biological roles of various epigenetic modifiers in regulating gene expression and functions of endothelial cells (vascular homeostasis, leukocyte adhesion, endothelial-mesenchymal transition, angiogenesis, and mechanotransduction), smooth muscle cells (proliferation, migration, inflammation, hypertrophy, and phenotypic switch), and macrophages (differentiation, inflammation, foam cell formation, and polarization) are discussed. The inherently dynamic nature and reversibility of epigenetic regulation, enables the possibility of epigenetic therapy by targeting epigenetic "writers", "readers", and "erasers". Several Food Drug Administration-approved small-molecule epigenetic drugs show promise in pre-clinical studies for the treatment of atherosclerosis. Finally, we discuss potential therapeutic implications and challenges for future research involving cardiovascular epigenetics, with an aim to provide a translational perspective for identifying novel biomarkers of atherosclerosis, and transforming precision cardiovascular research and disease therapy in modern era of epigenetics.
Topics: Animals; Atherosclerosis; Epigenesis, Genetic; Humans; Immunity; RNA, Untranslated; Risk Factors
PubMed: 30439455
DOI: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2018.11.003 -
Journal of Strength and Conditioning... May 2023Kassiano, W, Costa, B, Nunes, JP, Ribeiro, AS, Schoenfeld, BJ, and Cyrino, ES. Which ROMs lead to Rome? a systematic review of the effects of range of motion on muscle...
Kassiano, W, Costa, B, Nunes, JP, Ribeiro, AS, Schoenfeld, BJ, and Cyrino, ES. Which ROMs lead to Rome? a systematic review of the effects of range of motion on muscle hypertrophy. J Strength Cond Res 37(5): 1135-1144, 2022-Resistance exercise range of motion (ROM) influences muscular adaptations. However, there are no consistent practical guidelines about the optimal ROM for maximizing muscle hypertrophy. The objective of this article was to systematically review the literature for studies that compared the effects of full ROM (fROM) and partial ROM (pROM) on muscle hypertrophy. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify articles from the earliest record up to and including April 2022. We calculated the effect size (ES) scores of the variables of interest. Eleven studies were included in the review. Full ROM and pROM performed in the initial part of the ROM elicited greater muscle hypertrophy of the rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, biceps brachii, and brachialis distal sites (between-groups ES: 0.20-0.90) than pROM performed in the final part of the ROM. fROM elicited greater muscle growth on the gluteus maximus and adductors than pROM in the final part of the ROM (between-groups ES: 0.24-0.25). Initial pROM produced more favorable proximal rectus femoris hypertrophy than fROM (between-groups ES: 0.35-0.38). pROM in the middle part of the ROM elicited greater triceps brachii hypertrophy than fROM (between-group ES: 1.21). In conclusion, evidence suggests that when training at a longer muscle length-through either pROM or fROM-some muscles, such as quadriceps femoris, biceps brachii, and triceps brachii, tend to experience optimal growth. Thus, the use pROM in the initial part of the excursion in combination with fROM training should be considered when prescribing hypertrophy-oriented resistance training programs.
Topics: Humans; Muscle Strength; Rome; Muscle, Skeletal; Quadriceps Muscle; Range of Motion, Articular; Resistance Training; Hypertrophy
PubMed: 36662126
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004415 -
Journal of Strength and Conditioning... May 2020Roberts, BM, Nuckols, G, and Krieger, JW. Sex differences in resistance training: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1448-1460, 2020-The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Roberts, BM, Nuckols, G, and Krieger, JW. Sex differences in resistance training: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 34(5): 1448-1460, 2020-The purpose of this study was to determine whether there are different responses to resistance training for strength or hypertrophy in young to middle-aged males and females using the same resistance training protocol. The protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018094276). Meta-analyses were performed using robust variance random effects modeling for multilevel data structures, with adjustments for small samples using package robumeta in R. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. The analysis of hypertrophy comprised 12 outcomes from 10 studies with no significant difference between males and females (effect size [ES] = 0.07 ± 0.06; P = 0.31; I = 0). The analysis of upper-body strength comprised 19 outcomes from 17 studies with a significant effect favoring females (ES = -0.60 ± 0.16; P = 0.002; I = 72.1). The analysis of lower-body strength comprised 23 outcomes from 23 studies with no significant difference between sexes (ES = -0.21 ± 0.16; P = 0.20; I = 74.7). We found that males and females adapted to resistance training with similar effect sizes for hypertrophy and lower-body strength, but females had a larger effect for relative upper-body strength. Given the moderate effect size favoring females in the upper-body strength analysis, it is possible that untrained females display a higher capacity to increase upper-body strength than males. Further research is required to clarify why this difference occurs only in the upper body and whether the differences are due to neural, muscular, motor learning, or are an artifact of the short duration of studies included.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Hypertrophy; Male; Middle Aged; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training; Sex Characteristics; Time Factors; Young Adult
PubMed: 32218059
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003521 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Nov 2020Effects of resistance training on muscle strength and hypertrophy are well established in adults and younger elderly. However, less is currently known about these... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Effects of resistance training on muscle strength and hypertrophy are well established in adults and younger elderly. However, less is currently known about these effects in the very elderly (i.e., 75 years of age and older).
OBJECTIVE
To examine the effects of resistance training on muscle size and strength in very elderly individuals.
METHODS
Randomized controlled studies that explored the effects of resistance training in very elderly on muscle strength, handgrip strength, whole-muscle hypertrophy, and/or muscle fiber hypertrophy were included in the review. Meta-analyses of effect sizes (ESs) were used to analyze the data.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included in the review. The meta-analysis found a significant effect of resistance training on muscle strength in the very elderly [difference in ES = 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50, 1.44; p = 0.001]. In a subgroup analysis that included only the oldest-old participants (80 + years of age), there was a significant effect of resistance training on muscle strength (difference in ES = 1.28; 95% CI 0.28, 2.29; p = 0.020). For handgrip strength, we found no significant difference between resistance training and control groups (difference in ES = 0.26; 95% CI - 0.02, 0.54; p = 0.064). For whole-muscle hypertrophy, there was a significant effect of resistance training in the very elderly (difference in ES = 0 30; 95% CI 0.10, 0.50; p = 0.013). We found no significant difference in muscle fiber hypertrophy between resistance training and control groups (difference in ES = 0.33; 95% CI - 0.67, 1.33; p = 0.266). There were minimal reports of adverse events associated with the training programs in the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
We found that very elderly can increase muscle strength and muscle size by participating in resistance training programs. Resistance training was found to be an effective way to improve muscle strength even among the oldest-old.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Hand Strength; Humans; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resistance Training
PubMed: 32740889
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-020-01331-7