Aebi Mathias R, Willis Sarah J, Girard Olivier, Borrani Fabio, Millet Grégoire P
ISSUL, Institute of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Aeromedical Center (AeMC), Swiss Air Force, Dübendorf, Switzerland.
Front Physiol. 2019 Nov 14;10:1393. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2019.01393. eCollection 2019.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of active preconditioning techniques using blood flow restriction or/and systemic hypoxic exposure on repeated sprint cycling performance and oxygenation responses.
Participants were 17 men; 8 were cycle trained (T: 21 ± 6 h/week) and 9 were untrained but physically active (UT). Each participant completed 4 cycles of 5 min stages of cycling at 1.5 W⋅kg in four conditions [Control; IPC (ischemic preconditioning) with partial blood flow restriction (60% of relative total occlusion pressure); HPC (hypoxic preconditioning) in normobaric systemic hypoxia (FO 13.6%); and HIPC (hypoxic and ischemic preconditioning combined)]. Following a 40 min rest period, a repeated sprint exercise (RSE: 8 × 10 s sprints; 20 s of recovery) was performed. Near-infrared spectroscopy parameters [for each sprint, change in deoxyhemoglobin (Δ[HHb]), total hemoglobin (Δ[tHb]), and tissue saturation index (ΔTSI%)] were measured.
Trained participants achieved higher power outputs (+10-16%) than UT in all conditions, yet RSE performance did not differ between active preconditioning techniques in the two groups. All conditions induced similar sprint decrement scores during RSE in both T and UT (16 ± 2 vs. 23 ± 9% in CON; 17 ± 3 vs. 19 ± 6% in IPC; 18 ± 5 vs. 20 ± 10% in HPC; and 17 ± 3 vs. 21 ± 5% in HIPC, for T and UT, respectively). During the sprints, Δ[HHb] was larger after IPC than both HPC and CON in T ( < 0.001). The Δ[tHb] was greater after HPC than all other conditions in T, whereas IPC, HPC, and HIPC induced higher Δ[tHb] than CON in UT.
None of the active preconditioning methods had an ergogenic effect on repeated sprint cycling performance, despite some specific hemodynamic responses (e.g., greater oxygen extraction and changes in blood volume), which were emphasized in the trained cyclists.
本研究旨在评估使用血流限制或/和全身性低氧暴露的主动预处理技术对重复冲刺骑行表现和氧合反应的影响。
参与者为17名男性;8名接受过自行车训练(T组:每周21±6小时),9名未受过训练但身体活跃(UT组)。每位参与者在四种条件下完成4个5分钟阶段的骑行,功率为1.5W·kg[对照组;采用部分血流限制(相对总闭塞压力的60%)的缺血预处理(IPC);常压低氧(氧含量13.6%)下的低氧预处理(HPC);以及低氧缺血联合预处理(HIPC)]。在40分钟的休息期后,进行重复冲刺运动(RSE:8次×10秒冲刺;恢复20秒)。测量近红外光谱参数[每次冲刺时,脱氧血红蛋白变化量(Δ[HHb])、总血红蛋白变化量(Δ[tHb])和组织饱和度指数变化量(ΔTSI%)]。
在所有条件下,受过训练的参与者比UT组实现了更高的功率输出(+10 - 16%),然而两组中主动预处理技术之间的RSE表现并无差异。在T组和UT组中,所有条件在RSE期间均诱导出相似的冲刺功率下降分数(对照组中分别为16±2%和23±9%;IPC组中分别为17±3%和19±6%;HPC组中分别为18±5%和20±10%;HIPC组中分别为17±3%和21±5%)。在冲刺过程中,T组中IPC后的Δ[HHb]比HPC和对照组都大(<0.001)。T组中HPC后的Δ[tHb]比所有其他条件都大,而在UT组中,IPC、HPC和HIPC诱导的Δ[tHb]比对照组更高。
尽管存在一些特定的血流动力学反应(例如,更大的氧摄取和血容量变化),这些反应在受过训练的自行车运动员中更为突出,但没有一种主动预处理方法对重复冲刺骑行表现有促力作用。