-
Sports Medicine - Open Jul 2023One of the most popular time-efficient training methods when training for muscle hypertrophy is drop sets, which is performed by taking sets to concentric muscle failure...
BACKGROUND
One of the most popular time-efficient training methods when training for muscle hypertrophy is drop sets, which is performed by taking sets to concentric muscle failure at a given load, then making a drop by reducing the load and immediately taking the next set to concentric or voluntary muscle failure. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the effects of drop sets over traditional sets on skeletal muscle hypertrophy.
METHODS
This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The SPORTDiscus and MEDLINE/PubMed databases were searched on April 9, 2022, for all studies investigating the effects of the drop set training method on muscle hypertrophy that meets the predefined inclusion criteria. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Version 3 (Biostat Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA) was used to run the statistical analysis. Publication bias was assessed through visual inspection of the funnel plots for asymmetry and statistically by Egger's regression test with an alpha level of 0.10.
RESULTS
Six studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. The number of participants in the studies was 142 (28 women and 114 men) with an age range of 19.2-27 years. The average sample size was 23.6 ± 10.9 (range 9-41). Five studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. Meta-analysis showed that both the drop set and traditional training groups increased significantly from pre- to post-test regarding muscle hypertrophy (drop set standardized mean difference: 0.555, 95% CI 0.357-0.921, p < 0.0001; traditional set standardized mean difference: 0.437, 95% CI 0.266-0.608, p < 0.0001). No significant between-group difference was found (standardized mean difference: 0.155, 95% CI - 0.199 to - 0.509, p = 0.392).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that drop sets present an efficient strategy for maximizing hypertrophy in those with limited time for training. There was no significant difference in hypertrophy measurements between the drop set and traditional training groups, but some of the drop set modalities took half to one-third of the time compared with traditional training.
PubMed: 37523092
DOI: 10.1186/s40798-023-00620-5 -
International Journal of Environmental... Oct 2021Low-intensity training with blood flow restriction (LI-BFR) has been suggested as an alternative to high-intensity resistance training for the improvement of strength... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Resistance Training with Blood Flow Restriction Compared to Traditional Resistance Training on Strength and Muscle Mass in Non-Active Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Low-intensity training with blood flow restriction (LI-BFR) has been suggested as an alternative to high-intensity resistance training for the improvement of strength and muscle mass, becoming advisable for individuals who cannot assume such a load. The systematic review aimed to determine the effectiveness of the LI-BFR compared to dynamic high-intensity resistance training on strength and muscle mass in non-active older adults. A systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook and reportedly followed the PRISMA statement. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus databases were searched between September and October 2020. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. Twelve studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Meta-analysis pointed out significant differences in maximal voluntary contraction (MVC): SMD 0.61, 95% CI [0.10, 1.11], = 0.02, I 71% < 0.0001; but not in the repetition maximum (RM): SMD 0.07, 95% CI [-0.25, 0.40], = 0.66, I 0% < 0.53; neither in the muscle mass: SMD 0.62, 95% CI [-0.09, 1.34], = 0.09, I 59% = 0.05. Despite important limitations such as scarce literature regarding LI-BFR in older adults, the small sample size in most studies, the still differences in methodology and poor quality in many of them, this systematic review and meta-analysis revealed a positive benefit in non-active older adults. LI- BFR may induce increased muscular strength and muscle mass, at least at a similar extent to that in the traditional high-intensity resistance training.
Topics: Aged; Hemodynamics; Humans; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Regional Blood Flow; Resistance Training
PubMed: 34769957
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182111441 -
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 -
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 -
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 -
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 -
SAGE Open Medicine 2020The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature as to the effects of performing exercise with a full versus partial range of motion (ROM) during... (Review)
Review
The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature as to the effects of performing exercise with a full versus partial range of motion (ROM) during dynamic, longitudinal resistance training (RT) programs on changes in muscle hypertrophy. Based on the available literature, we aimed to draw evidence-based recommendations for RT prescription. Six studies were identified as meeting inclusion criteria: four of these studies involved RT for the lower limbs while the other two focused on the upper extremities. The total combined sample of the studies was = 135, which comprised 127 men and 8 women. The methodological quality of all included studies was deemed to be "excellent" based on the modified PEDro scale. When assessing the current body of literature, it can be inferred that performing RT through a full ROM confers beneficial effects on hypertrophy of the lower body musculature versus training with a partial ROM. Alternatively, research on the effects of ROM for the upper limbs is limited and conflicting, precluding the ability to draw strong practical inferences. No study to date has investigated how ROM influences muscle growth of the trunk musculature. Finally, some evidence indicates that the response to variations in ROM may be muscle-specific; however, this hypothesis also warrants further study.
PubMed: 32030125
DOI: 10.1177/2050312120901559 -
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... Mar 2020Blood flow restriction (BFR) is a process of using inflatable cuffs to create vascular occlusion within a limb during exercise. The technique can stimulate muscle...
BACKGROUND
Blood flow restriction (BFR) is a process of using inflatable cuffs to create vascular occlusion within a limb during exercise. The technique can stimulate muscle hypertrophy and improve physical function; however, most of these studies have enrolled healthy, young men with a focus on athletic performance. Furthermore, much of the information on BFR comes from studies with small samples sizes, limited follow-up time, and varied research designs resulting in greater design, selection, and sampling bias. Despite these limitations, BFR's popularity is increasing as a clinical rehabilitation tool for aging patients. It is important for practitioners to have a clear understanding of the reported effects of BFR specifically in older adults while simultaneously critically evaluating the available literature before deciding to employ the technique.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
(1) Does BFR induce skeletal muscle hypertrophy in adults older than 50 years of age? (2) Does BFR improve muscle strength and/or physical function in adults older than 50 years?
METHODS
Using PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Science Direct, we conducted a systematic review of articles using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to assess the reported effects of BFR on skeletal muscle in older adults. Included articles enrolled participants 50 years of age or older and used BFR in conjunction with exercise to study the effects of BFR on musculoskeletal outcomes and functionality. The following search terms were used: "blood flow restriction" OR "KAATSU" OR "ischemic training" AND "clinical" AND "elderly." After duplicates were removed, 1574 articles were reviewed for eligibility, and 30 articles were retained with interventions duration ranging from cross-sectional to 16 weeks. Sample sizes ranged from 6 to 56 participants, and exercise tasks included passive mobilization or electrical stimulation; walking; resistance training using machines, free weights, body weight, or elastic bands; and water-based activities. Furthermore, healthy participants and those with cardiovascular disease, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, sporadic inclusion body myositis, spinal cord injuries, and current coma patients were studied. Lastly, retained articles were assigned a risk of bias score using aspects of the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials.
RESULTS
BFR, in combination with a variety of exercises, was found to result in muscle hypertrophy as measured by muscle cross-sectional area, thickness, volume, mass, or circumference. Effect sizes for BFR's ability to induce muscle hypertrophy were calculated for 16 of the 30 papers and averaged 0.75. BFR was also shown to improve muscle strength and functional performance. Effect sizes were calculated for 21 of the 30 papers averaging 1.15.
CONCLUSIONS
Available evidence suggests BFR may demonstrate utility in aiding rehabilitation efforts in adults older than 50 years of age, especially for inducing muscle hypertrophy, combating muscle atrophy, increasing muscle strength, and improving muscle function. However, most studies in this systematic review were at moderate or high risk of bias; that being so, the findings in this systematic review should be confirmed, ideally using greater sample sizes, randomization of participants, and extended follow-up durations.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level II, systematic review.
Topics: Aged; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Hypertrophy; Male; Middle Aged; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Orthopedic Procedures; Regional Blood Flow; Vasoconstriction
PubMed: 31860546
DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001090 -
International Journal of Sports... 2021Blood flow restriction (BFR) training has been reported to have significant benefits on local skeletal muscle including increasing local muscle mass, strength, and...
BACKGROUND
Blood flow restriction (BFR) training has been reported to have significant benefits on local skeletal muscle including increasing local muscle mass, strength, and endurance while exercising with lower resistance. As a result, patients unable to perform traditional resistance training may benefit from this technique. However, it is unclear what effects BFR may have on other body systems, such as the cardiovascular and pulmonary systems. It is important to explore the systemic effects of BFR training to ensure it is safe for use in physical therapy.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to systematically review the systemic effects of blood flow restriction training when combined with exercise intervention.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
METHODS
Three literature searches were performed: June 2019, September 2019, and January 2020; using MedLine, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Cochrane Reviews and CINAHL Complete. Inclusion criteria included: at least one outcome measure addressing a cardiovascular, endocrinological, systemic or proximal musculoskeletal, or psychosocial outcome, use of clinically available blood flow restriction equipment, use of either resistance or aerobic training in combination with BFR, and use of quantitative measures. Exclusion criteria for articles included only measuring local or distal musculoskeletal changes due to BFR training, examining only passive BFR or ischemic preconditioning, articles not originating from a scholarly peer-reviewed journal, CEBM level of evidence less than two, or PEDro score less than four. Articles included in this review were analyzed with the CEBM levels of evidence hierarchy and PEDro scale.
RESULTS
Thirty-five articles were included in the review. PEDro scores ranged between 4 and 8, and had CEBM levels of evidence of 1 and 2. Common systems studied included cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, endocrine, and psychosocial. This review found positive or neutral effects of blood flow restriction training on cardiovascular, endocrinological, musculoskeletal, and psychosocial outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Although BFR prescription parameters and exercise interventions varied, the majority of included articles reported BFR training to produce favorable or non-detrimental effects to the cardiovascular, endocrine, and musculoskeletal systems. This review also found mixed effects on psychosocial outcomes when using BFR. Additionally, this review found no detrimental outcomes directly attributed to blood flow restriction training on the test subjects or outcomes tested. Thus, BFR training may be an effective intervention for patient populations that are unable to perform traditional exercise training with positive effects other than traditional distal muscle hypertrophy and strength and without significant drawbacks to the individual.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
1b.
PubMed: 34386277
DOI: 10.26603/001c.25791