Dankel S J, Buckner S L, Counts B R, Jessee M B, Mouser J G, Mattocks K T, Laurentino G C, Abe T, Loenneke J P
1 Department of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management, Kevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, The University of Mississippi , University, MS, USA.
2 Department of Sport and Life Sciences, National Institute of Fitness and Sports in Kanoya , Kanoya, Kagoshima, Japan.
Physiol Int. 2017 Mar 1;104(1):64-76. doi: 10.1556/2060.104.2017.1.1.
The purpose of this study was to determine acute physiological and perceptual responses to two commonly implemented blood flow restriction protocols. Using a within-subject design, 15 participants (age ∼25) performed four sets of unilateral elbow flexion with each arm. One arm exercised using a 3-cm elastic cuff inflated to 160 mmHg, whereas the other arm exercised using a 5-cm nylon cuff inflated to 40% of the individual's arterial occlusion pressure. While both protocols elicited increases in acute muscle thickness [pre: 4.5 (0.2) cm, post: 5.0 (0.2) cm; p < 0.001] and electromyography amplitude [first 3 reps: 55 ( 5 ) %MVC; last 3 reps: 87 ( 10 ) %MVC], there were no differences between conditions. Both protocols produced decreases in post-exercise strength (pre: 70 Nm, post: 51 Nm; p < 0.001) with no difference between conditions. The nylon protocol resulted in more repetitions during sets 2 [13 ( 2 ) vs. 9 ( 4 ); p = 0.001] and 3 [10 ( 2 ) vs. 7 ( 4 ); p = 0.05], while producing lower levels of discomfort following each set (average 3 vs. 4; p < 0.05). In conclusion, both protocols produced similar acute responses thought to be important for promoting muscle growth. However, the use of arbitrary pressures may place some individuals under complete arterial occlusion which may increase the potential risk of an adverse event.
本研究的目的是确定对两种常用的血流限制方案的急性生理和感知反应。采用受试者内设计,15名参与者(年龄约25岁)对每只手臂进行四组单侧肘部屈曲。一只手臂使用充气至160 mmHg的3厘米弹性袖带进行锻炼,而另一只手臂使用充气至个体动脉闭塞压40%的5厘米尼龙袖带进行锻炼。虽然两种方案均引起急性肌肉厚度增加[锻炼前:4.5(0.2)厘米,锻炼后:5.0(0.2)厘米;p<0.001]和肌电图幅度增加[前3次重复:55(5)%最大自主收缩;最后3次重复:87(10)%最大自主收缩],但两种情况之间没有差异。两种方案均导致运动后力量下降(锻炼前:70 Nm,锻炼后:51 Nm;p<0.001),两种情况之间没有差异。尼龙方案在第2组[13(2)次对9(4)次;p = 0.001]和第3组[10(2)次对7(4)次;p = 0.05]中导致更多的重复次数,同时每组后的不适程度较低(平均3级对4级;p<0.05)。总之,两种方案产生了相似的急性反应,这些反应被认为对促进肌肉生长很重要。然而,使用任意压力可能会使一些个体处于完全动脉闭塞状态,这可能会增加不良事件的潜在风险。