Bergamasco João Guilherme Almeida, Bittencourt Diego, Silva Deivid Gomes, Biazon Thaís Marina Pires de Campos, Soligon Samuel Domingos, Oliveira Ramon Martins, Libardi Cleiton Augusto
MUSCULAB - Laboratory of Neuromuscular Adaptations to Resistance Training, Department of Physical Education, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos, SP, Brazil.
J Sports Sci. 2025 Oct;43(19):2157-2163. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2024.2437588. Epub 2024 Dec 15.
We aimed to compare individual hypertrophic responses to high-load resistance training (HL-RT) or high-load with blood flow restriction (HL-BFR). Furthermore, we investigated whether greater responsiveness to one of the protocols could be explained by acute changes in blood deoxyhemoglobin concentration (HHb) and total hemoglobin concentration (tHb) (proxy markers of metabolic stress). Ten untrained participants had their legs randomized into both HL-RT and HL-BFR and underwent 10 weeks of training. Muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) was measured at baseline and post training, while HHb and tHb during the final session. Using a threshold of 2 × typical errors (3.24%) to compare protocols, five participants showed greater mCSA increases after HL-RT (16.44 ± 7.90%) compared to HL-BFR (10.74 ± 7.12%, = 0.0054) and five did not respond better to HL-RT (8.95 ± 10.83%) compared to HL-BFR (13.33 ± 8.59%) ( = 0.3105). Additionally, HL-RT induced lower HHb (5855.78 ± 12905.99; = 0.0101) and tHb (-43169.70 ± 37793.17; = 0.0030) AUC values compared to HL-BFR (HHb: 39254.80 ± 27020.15; tHb: 46309.40 ± 31613.97). In conclusion, despite the higher levels of metabolic stress markers, most participants did not present greater muscle hypertrophy by combining blood flow restriction with HL-RT.
我们旨在比较个体对高负荷抗阻训练（HL-RT）或高负荷联合血流限制（HL-BFR）的肥大反应。此外，我们研究了对其中一种方案的更大反应性是否可以通过血液脱氧血红蛋白浓度（HHb）和总血红蛋白浓度（tHb）（代谢应激的替代标志物）的急性变化来解释。10名未经训练的参与者将其双腿随机分为HL-RT组和HL-BFR组，并进行了10周的训练。在基线和训练后测量肌肉横截面积（mCSA），同时在最后一次训练期间测量HHb和tHb。使用2×典型误差（3.24%）的阈值来比较方案，5名参与者在HL-RT后mCSA增加幅度更大（16.44±7.90%），而HL-BFR组为（10.74±7.12%，P = 0.0054），另外5名参与者对HL-RT的反应不如HL-BFR（8.95±10.83%）（13.33±8.59%，P = 0.3105）。此外，与HL-BFR相比，HL-RT诱导的HHb（5855.78±12905.99；P = 0.0101）和tHb（-43169.70±37793.17；P = 0.0030）AUC值更低（HHb：39254.80±27020.15；tHb：46309.40±31613.97）。总之，尽管代谢应激标志物水平较高，但大多数参与者并未通过将血流限制与HL-RT相结合而表现出更大的肌肉肥大。
