Suppr超能文献

向心与离心肌肉动作的肥大效应:系统评价与荟萃分析

Hypertrophic Effects of Concentric vs. Eccentric Muscle Actions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

作者信息

Schoenfeld Brad J, Ogborn Dan I, Vigotsky Andrew D, Franchi Martino V, Krieger James W

机构信息

1Department of Health Science, Lehman College, Bronx, New York; 2Total Rehabilitation and Sports Injuries Clinic, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada; 3Department of Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois; 4MRC-ARUK Center of Excellence for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Derby, United Kingdom; and 5Weightology, LLC, Issaquah, Washington.

出版信息

J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Sep;31(9):2599-2608. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001983.

Abstract

Schoenfeld, BJ, Ogborn, DI, Vigotsky, AD, Franchi, MV, and Krieger, JW. Hypertrophic effects of concentric vs. eccentric muscle actions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 31(9): 2599-2608, 2017-Controversy exists as to whether different dynamic muscle actions produce divergent hypertrophic responses. The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the hypertrophic effects of concentric vs. eccentric training in healthy adults after regimented resistance training (RT). Studies were deemed eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (a) were an experimental trial published in an English-language refereed journal; (b) directly compared concentric and eccentric actions without the use of external implements (i.e., blood pressure cuffs) and all other RT variables equivalent; (c) measured morphologic changes using biopsy, imaging (magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography, or ultrasound), bioelectrical impedance, and/or densitometry; (d) had a minimum duration of 6 weeks; and (e) used human participants without musculoskeletal injury or any health condition that could directly, or through the medications associated with the management of said condition, be expected to impact the hypertrophic response to resistance exercise. A systematic literature search determined that 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Results showed that eccentric muscle actions resulted in a greater effect size (ES) compared with concentric actions, but results did not reach statistical significance (ES difference = 0.25 ± 0.13; 95% confidence interval: -0.03 to 0.52; p = 0.076). The mean percent change in muscle growth across studies favored eccentric compared with concentric actions (10.0% vs. 6.8, respectively). The findings indicate the importance of including eccentric and concentric actions in a hypertrophy-oriented RT program, as both have shown to be effective in increasing muscle hypertrophy.

摘要

舍恩菲尔德、BJ、奥格本、DI、维戈茨基、AD、弗兰奇、MV和克里格、JW。向心与离心肌肉动作的肥大效应:系统评价与荟萃分析。《力量与体能研究杂志》31(9): 2599 - 2608,2017年——关于不同的动态肌肉动作是否会产生不同的肥大反应存在争议。本文的目的是对随机对照试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析,比较在进行有规律的阻力训练(RT)后,向心训练与离心训练对健康成年人的肥大效应。如果研究符合以下标准,则被认为符合纳入条件:(a) 是发表在英文同行评审期刊上的实验性试验;(b) 直接比较向心和离心动作,不使用外部器具(即血压袖带)且所有其他RT变量相同;(c) 使用活检、成像(磁共振成像、计算机断层扫描或超声)、生物电阻抗和/或密度测定法测量形态学变化;(d) 最短持续时间为6周;(e) 使用无肌肉骨骼损伤或任何健康状况的人类参与者,这些状况不会直接或通过与所述状况管理相关的药物预期会影响对阻力运动的肥大反应。系统的文献检索确定有15项研究符合纳入标准。结果表明,与向心动作相比,离心肌肉动作产生了更大的效应量(ES),但结果未达到统计学显著性(ES差异 = 0.25 ± 0.13;95%置信区间:-0.03至0.52;p = 0.076)。与向心动作相比,各研究中肌肉生长的平均百分比变化更倾向于离心动作(分别为10.0%和6.8%)。研究结果表明,在以肥大训练为导向的RT计划中纳入离心和向心动作很重要,因为两者都已证明对增加肌肉肥大有效。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验