-
Aging and Disease Feb 2022Aging is a prominent risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, which is the leading cause of death around the world. Recently, cellular senescence has received potential... (Review)
Review
Aging is a prominent risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, which is the leading cause of death around the world. Recently, cellular senescence has received potential attention as a promising target in preventing cardiovascular diseases, including acute myocardial infarction, atherosclerosis, cardiac aging, pressure overload-induced hypertrophy, heart regeneration, hypertension, and abdominal aortic aneurysm. Here, we discuss the mechanisms underlying cellular senescence and describe the involvement of senescent cardiovascular cells (including cardiomyocytes, endothelial cells, vascular smooth muscle cells, fibroblasts/myofibroblasts and T cells) in age-related cardiovascular diseases. Then, we highlight the targets (SIRT1 and mTOR) that regulating cellular senescence in cardiovascular disorders. Furthermore, we review the evidence that senescent cells can exert both beneficial and detrimental implications in cardiovascular diseases on a context-dependent manner. Finally, we summarize the emerging pro-senescent or anti-senescent interventions and discuss their therapeutic potential in preventing cardiovascular diseases.
PubMed: 35111365
DOI: 10.14336/AD.2021.0927 -
European Journal of Sport Science Feb 2021The objectives of this paper were to: (a) systematically review studies that explored the effects of exercise order (EO) on muscular strength and/or hypertrophy; (b)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The objectives of this paper were to: (a) systematically review studies that explored the effects of exercise order (EO) on muscular strength and/or hypertrophy; (b) pool their results using a meta-analysis; and (c) provide recommendations for the prescription of EO in resistance training (RT) programmes. A literature search was performed in four databases. Studies were included if they explored the effects of EO on dynamic muscular strength and/or muscle hypertrophy. The meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model with Hedges' g effect size (ES). The methodological quality of studies was appraised using the TESTEX checklist. Eleven good-to-excellent methodological quality studies were included in the review. When all strength tests, that is, both in multi-joint (MJ) and single-joint (SJ) exercises were considered, there was no difference between the EOs (ES = -0.11; 0.306). However, there was a difference between the MJ-to-SJ and SJ-to-MJ orders for strength gains in the MJ exercises, favouring starting the exercise session with MJ exercises (ES = 0.32; 0.034), and the strength gains in the SJ exercises, favouring starting the exercise session with SJ exercises (ES = -0.58; 0.032). No significant effect of EO was observed for hypertrophy combining site-specific and indirect measures (ES = 0.03; 0.862). In conclusion, increases in muscular strength are the largest in the exercises performed at the beginning of an exercise session. For muscle hypertrophy, our meta-analysis indicated that both MJ-to-SJ and SJ-to-MJ EOs may produce similar results.
Topics: Humans; Hypertrophy; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training
PubMed: 32077380
DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2020.1733672 -
Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County,... 2022Creatine supplementation has been shown to increase measures of lean body mass (LBM); however, there often is high heterogeneity across individual studies. Therefore,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Influence of age, sex, and type of exercise on the efficacy of creatine supplementation on lean body mass: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Creatine supplementation has been shown to increase measures of lean body mass (LBM); however, there often is high heterogeneity across individual studies. Therefore, the aim of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating creatine supplementation on LBM. Subanalyses were performed based on age, sex, and type of exercise. Based on PRISMA guidelines, we searched the following databases: Pubmed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, and Scopus (PROSPERO register: CRD42020207122) until May 2022. RCTs for investigation of creatine supplementation on LBM were included. Animal studies and studies on individuals with specific diseases were excluded. Thirty-five studies were included, with 1192 participants. Overall (i.e., inclusion of all studies with and without exercise training interventions) revealed that creatine increased LBM by 0.68 kg (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-1.11). Subanalyses revealed greater gains in LBM when creatine was combined with resistance training (mean difference [MD], 1.10 kg; 95% CI, 0.56-1.65), regardless of age. There was no statistically significant effect of creatine on LBM when combined with mixed exercise (MD, 0.74 kg; 95% CI, -3.89 to 5.36) or without exercise (MD, 0.03 kg; 95% CI, -0.65 to 0.70). Further subanalyses found that males on creatine increased LBM by 1.46 kg (95% CI, 0.47-2.46), compared with a non-significant increase of 0.29 kg (95% CI, -0.43 to 1.01) for females. In conclusion, the addition of creatine supplementation to a resistance training program increases LBM. During a resistance training program, males on creatine respond more favorably than females.
Topics: Male; Female; Animals; Creatine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Body Composition; Exercise; Dietary Supplements; Muscle Strength
PubMed: 35986981
DOI: 10.1016/j.nut.2022.111791 -
The Journal of Sports Medicine and... Aug 2022The aim of this study was to compare changes in muscle size, strength, and power between free-weight and machine-based exercises. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this study was to compare changes in muscle size, strength, and power between free-weight and machine-based exercises.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The online databases of Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science were each searched using the following terms: "free weights" OR barbells OR dumbbells AND machines" up until September 15, 2020. A three-level random effects meta-analytic model was used to compute effect sizes.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
When strength was tested using a free-weight exercise, individuals training with free-weights gained more strength than those training with machines (ES: 0.655; [95% CI: 0.269, 1.041]). When strength was tested a machine-based exercise incorporated as part of the machine-based training program, individuals training with machines gained more strength than those training with free-weights (ES: -0.784 [95% CI: -1.223, -0.344]). When strength was tested using a neutral device, machines and free-weight exercises resulted in similar strength gains (ES: 0.128 [95% CI: -0303, 0.559]). There were no differences in the change in power (ES: -0.049 [95% CI: -0.557, 0.460]) or muscle hypertrophy (ES: -0.01 [95% CI: -0.525, 0.545]) between exercise modes.
CONCLUSIONS
Individuals looking to increase strength and power should consider the specificity of exercise, and how their strength and power will be tested and applied. Individuals looking to increase general strength and muscle mass to maintain health may choose whichever activity they prefer and are more likely to adhere to.
Topics: Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training
PubMed: 34609100
DOI: 10.23736/S0022-4707.21.12929-9 -
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 -
Journal of Strength and Conditioning... Mar 2021Baz-Valle, E, Fontes-Villalba, M, and Santos-Concejero, J. Total number of sets as a training volume quantification method for muscle hypertrophy: A systematic review. J...
Baz-Valle, E, Fontes-Villalba, M, and Santos-Concejero, J. Total number of sets as a training volume quantification method for muscle hypertrophy: A systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 35(3): 870-878, 2021-This review aimed to determine whether assessing the total number of sets is a valid method to quantify training volume in the context of hypertrophy training. A literature search on 2 databases (PubMed and Scopus) was conducted on May 18, 2018. After analyzing 2,585 resultant articles, studies were included if they met the following criteria: (a) studies were randomized controlled trials, (b) studies compared the total number of sets, repetition range, or training frequency, (c) interventions lasted at least 6 weeks, (d) subjects had a minimum of 1 year of resistance training experience, (e) subjects' age ranged from 18 to 35 years, (f) studies reported morphologic changes through direct or indirect assessment methods, (g) studies involved subjects with no known medical conditions, and (h) studies were published in peer-reviewed journals. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. According to the results of this review, the total number of sets to failure, or near to, seems to be an adequate method to quantify training volume when the repetition range lies between 6 and 20+ if all the other variables are kept constant. This approach requires further development to assess whether specific numbers of sets are key to inducing optimal muscle gains.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Humans; Hypertrophy; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design; Resistance Training; Young Adult
PubMed: 30063555
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002776 -
European Journal of Heart Failure Dec 2022An algorithm for non-invasive diagnosis of amyloid transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR-CA) and novel disease-modifying therapies have prompted an active search for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
An algorithm for non-invasive diagnosis of amyloid transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR-CA) and novel disease-modifying therapies have prompted an active search for CA. We examined the prevalence of CA in different settings based on literature data.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We performed a systematic search for screening studies on CA, focusing on the prevalence, sex and age distribution in different clinical settings. The prevalence of CA in different settings was as follows: bone scintigraphy for non-cardiac reasons (n = 5 studies), 1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0%-1%); heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (n = 6), 12% (95% CI 6%-20%); heart failure with reduced or mildly reduced ejection fraction (n = 2), 10% (95% CI 6%-15%); conduction disorders warranting pacemaker implantation (n = 1), 2% (95% CI 0%-4%); surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 3), 7% (95% CI 5%-10%); hypertrophic cardiomyopathy phenotype (n = 2), 7% (95% CI 5%-9%); severe aortic stenosis (n = 7), 8% (95% CI 5%-13%); autopsy series of 'unselected' elderly individuals (n = 4), 21% (95% CI 7%-39%). The average age of CA patients in the different settings ranged from 74 to 90 years, and the percentage of men from 50% to 100%. Many patients had ATTR-CA, but the average percentage of patients with amyloid light-chain (AL) CA was up to 18%.
CONCLUSIONS
Searching for CA in specific settings allows to identify a relatively high number of cases who may be eligible for treatment if the diagnosis is unequivocal. ATTR-CA accounts for many cases of CA across the different settings, but AL-CA is not infrequent. Median age at diagnosis falls in the eighth or ninth decades, and many patients diagnosed with CA are women.
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Heart Failure; Amyloidosis; Amyloid; Phenotype; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left; Cardiomyopathies
PubMed: 35509173
DOI: 10.1002/ejhf.2532 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Dec 2020Patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and patients suffering from knee osteoarthritis (KOA) have been shown to have quadriceps muscle... (Review)
Review
Comparison of Blood Flow Restriction Training versus Non-Occlusive Training in Patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction or Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.
Patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and patients suffering from knee osteoarthritis (KOA) have been shown to have quadriceps muscle weakness and/or atrophy in common. The physiological mechanisms of blood flow restriction (BFR) training could facilitate muscle hypertrophy. The purpose of this systematic review is to investigate the effects of BFR training on quadriceps cross-sectional area (CSA), pain perception, function and quality of life on these patients compared to a non-BFR training. A literature research was performed using Web of Science, PEDro, Scopus, MEDLINE, Dialnet, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library databases. The main inclusion criteria were that papers were English or Spanish language reports of randomized controlled trials involving patients with ACL reconstruction or suffering from KOA. The initial research identified 159 publications from all databases; 10 articles were finally included. The search was conducted from April to June 2020. Four of these studies found a significant improvement in strength. A significant increase in CSA was found in two studies. Pain significantly improved in four studies and only one study showed a significant improvement in functionality/quality of life. Low-load training with BFR may be an effective option treatment for increasing quadriceps strength and CSA, but more research is needed.
PubMed: 33375515
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10010068 -
Journal of Strength and Conditioning... Jun 2022Kassiano, W, Nunes, JP, Costa, B, Ribeiro, AS, Schoenfeld, BJ, and Cyrino, ES. Does varying resistance exercises promote superior muscle hypertrophy and strength gains?...
Kassiano, W, Nunes, JP, Costa, B, Ribeiro, AS, Schoenfeld, BJ, and Cyrino, ES. Does varying resistance exercises promote superior muscle hypertrophy and strength gains? A systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 36(6): 1753-1762, 2022-Fitness professionals routinely employ a variety of resistance training exercises in program design as a strategy to enhance muscular adaptations. However, it remains uncertain whether such an approach offers advantages over a fixed-exercise selection. The objective of this review was to review the effects of exercise variation on muscle hypertrophy and strength. A search of the literature was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Eight studies were identified as meeting inclusion criteria. The combined total sample of the studies was N = 241, comprising all young men. The methodological quality of included studies was considered "good" and "excellent" based on the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale. The available studies indicate that varying exercise selection can influence muscle hypertrophy and strength gains. Some degree of systematic variation seems to enhance regional hypertrophic adaptations and maximize dynamic strength, whereas excessive, random variation may compromise muscular gains. We conclude that exercise variation should be approached systematically with a focus on applied anatomical and biomechanical constructs; on the contrary, employing different exercises that provide a redundant stimulus, as well as excessive rotation of different exercises (i.e., high frequency of change), may actually hinder muscular adaptations.
Topics: Exercise; Humans; Hypertrophy; Male; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training
PubMed: 35438660
DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004258 -
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