Fahs Christopher A, Rossow Lindy M, Loenneke Jeremy P, Thiebaud Robert S, Kim Daeyeol, Bemben Debra A, Bemben Michael G
Neuromuscular Laboratory, Department of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA.
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2012 Jan;32(1):45-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2011.01053.x. Epub 2011 Sep 15.
Low-intensity resistance exercise combined with blood flow restriction has been shown to produce comparable increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy as traditional high-intensity (HI) resistance training. However, the vascular effects of low-intensity blood flow-restricted (LI-BFR) exercise training are not well characterized. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the vascular effects of LI-BFR, moderate-intensity (MI), and HI resistance exercise training. Forty-six young men were divided into four groups: a HI, MI or LI-BFR lower body resistance training group or a non-exercise control group (C). Blood pressure, arterial compliance and calf vascular conductance (CVC) were assessed before and after the 6-week intervention. After the intervention, CVC was significantly increased in the three exercise groups combined compared with C (47·5 ± 3·1 versus 35·0 ± 4·5 flow per mmHg) without any changes in arterial compliance in any group. These results suggest HI, MI and LI-BFR lower body resistance exercises increase CVC, but do not affect arterial compliance. LI-BFR resistance exercise may be an effective alternative to HI resistance exercise for improving vascular conductance for individuals unable to perform HI resistance exercise. As more evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of LI-BFR resistance exercise continues to mount, this may provide a research base for prescribing this type of exercise if and/or when this type of exercise becomes more available worldwide.
低强度抗阻运动联合血流限制已被证明在肌肉力量和肥大方面能产生与传统高强度(HI)抗阻训练相当的增长。然而,低强度血流限制(LI-BFR)运动训练的血管效应尚未得到充分表征。因此,本研究的目的是比较LI-BFR、中等强度(MI)和HI抗阻运动训练的血管效应。46名年轻男性被分为四组:HI、MI或LI-BFR下肢抗阻训练组或非运动对照组(C)。在为期6周的干预前后评估血压、动脉顺应性和小腿血管传导性(CVC)。干预后,与C组相比,三个运动组的CVC联合显著增加(47.5±3.1与35.0±4.5每毫米汞柱血流),且任何组的动脉顺应性均无变化。这些结果表明,HI、MI和LI-BFR下肢抗阻运动均可增加CVC,但不影响动脉顺应性。对于无法进行HI抗阻运动的个体,LI-BFR抗阻运动可能是改善血管传导性的HI抗阻运动的有效替代方案。随着关于LI-BFR抗阻运动安全性和有效性的更多证据不断增加,如果和/或当这种运动在全球范围内更普及,这可能为开具此类运动处方提供研究基础。