Chen Lin-Sheng, McLaurin Natalie, Brosselin Philippe, Charry Daniela, Alhalimi Taha, Tanaka Hirofumi
Department of Kinesiology and Health Education, The University of Texas at Austin, 2109 San Jacinto Blvd, D3700, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2025 Apr 25. doi: 10.1007/s00421-025-05795-1.
Narrow-elastic bands (NE) and wide-rigid cuffs (WR) are two types of cuffs that are frequently used in blood flow restriction (BFR) training. Because these cuffs produce different hemodynamic responses, vascular adaptations might differ depending upon what cuffs are used. We examined the hypothesis that BFR with NE would improve vascular function while BFR with WR would decrease vascular function.
Twenty-six young healthy participants completed supervised BFR training for 2 weeks with NE placed on one arm and WR on the other arm during upper-body resistance exercise using random arm allocation with counterbalancing across the participants. Flow-mediated dilation (FMD), arterial stiffness, muscle strength, and muscle mass in both arms were measured before and after the intervention. To explore possible mechanisms underlying vascular adaptations, retrograde shear rates (SR) induced by different cuffs in the brachial artery were also measured before the intervention.
Muscle strength increased in both arms (p < 0.05). FMD increased in the NE arm (5.6 ± 2.9 to 7.7 ± 3.4%, p = 0.004) but did not change in the WR arm (6.0 ± 2.5 to 4.9 ± 2.7%, p = 0.12). Retrograde SR was higher under WR occlusion compared with NE occlusion and no cuff (no cuff: 22 ± 9, NE: 25 ± 9 vs. WR: 39 ± 13 s, p < 0.001). A negative correlation was found between WR occlusion-induced changes in retrograde SR and relative changes in FMD (r = -0.42, p = 0.02).
Different BFR cuffs led to similar muscle adaptations but different vascular adaptations. The difference in the vascular adaptation between two different cuffs might be explained by a greater retrograde SR induced by WR occlusion.
窄弹性带（NE）和宽刚性袖带（WR）是血流限制（BFR）训练中常用的两种袖带。由于这些袖带会产生不同的血流动力学反应，血管适应性可能会因使用的袖带不同而有所差异。我们检验了以下假设：使用NE进行BFR会改善血管功能，而使用WR进行BFR会降低血管功能。
26名年轻健康参与者完成了为期2周的有监督BFR训练，在上半身抗阻运动期间，一只手臂佩戴NE，另一只手臂佩戴WR，参与者采用随机手臂分配并进行交叉平衡。在干预前后测量双臂的血流介导的血管舒张（FMD）、动脉僵硬度、肌肉力量和肌肉质量。为了探究血管适应性潜在的可能机制，在干预前还测量了不同袖带在肱动脉中诱导的逆行剪切率（SR）。
双臂的肌肉力量均增加（p < 0.05）。NE臂的FMD增加（从5.6±2.9%增至7.7±3.4%，p = 0.004），而WR臂未改变（从6.0±2.5%降至4.9±2.7%，p = 0.12）。与NE袖带和无袖带相比，WR袖带阻塞时的逆行SR更高（无袖带：22±9，NE：25±9，WR：39±13秒，p < 0.001）。发现WR袖带阻塞引起的逆行SR变化与FMD的相对变化之间存在负相关（r = -0.42，p = 0.02）。
不同的BFR袖带导致相似的肌肉适应性，但血管适应性不同。两种不同袖带之间血管适应性的差异可能是由于WR袖带阻塞诱导的更高逆行SR所致。
