Although the amount of evidence demonstrating the beneficial effects of ischemic preconditioning (IPC) on exercise performance is increasing, conclusions about its efficacy cannot yet be drawn. Therefore, the purposes of this review were to determine the effect of IPC on exercise performance and identify the effects of different IPC procedures, exercise types, and subject characteristics on exercise performance. The analysis comprised 19 relevant studies from 2000 to 2015, 15 of which were included in the meta-analyses. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated as the standardized mean difference. Overall, IPC had a small beneficial effect on exercise performance (ES = 0.43; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.51). The largest ES were found for aerobic (ES = 0.51; 90% CI, 0.35 to 0.67) and anaerobic (ES = 0.23; 90% CI, -0.12 to 0.58) exercise. In contrast, an unclear effect was observed in power and sprint performance (ES = 0.16; 90% CI, -0.20 to 0.52). In conclusion, IPC can effectively enhance aerobic and anaerobic exercise performance.

This study investigated the effects of ischemic preconditioning (IPC) on the ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), surface electromyography, and pulmonary oxygen uptake (V̇o2) onset kinetics during cycling until exhaustion at the peak power output attained during an incremental test. A group of 12 recreationally trained cyclists volunteered for this study. After determination of peak power output during an incremental test, they were randomly subjected on different days to a performance protocol preceded by intermittent bilateral cuff pressure inflation to 220 mmHg (IPC) or 20 mmHg (control). To increase data reliability, the performance visits were replicated, also in a random manner. There was an 8.0% improvement in performance after IPC (control: 303 s, IPC 327 s, factor SDs of ×/÷1.13, P = 0.01). This change was followed by a 2.9% increase in peak V̇o2 (control: 3.95 l/min, IPC: 4.06 l/min, factor SDs of ×/÷1.15, P = 0.04), owing to a higher amplitude of the slow component of the V̇o2 kinetics (control: 0.45 l/min, IPC: 0.63 l/min, factor SDs of ×/÷2.21, P = 0.05). There was also an attenuation in the rate of increase in RPE (P = 0.01) and a progressive increase in the myoelectrical activity of the vastus lateralis muscle (P = 0.04). Furthermore, the changes in peak V̇o2 (r = 0.73, P = 0.007) and the amplitude of the slow component (r = 0.79, P = 0.002) largely correlated with performance improvement. These findings provide a link between improved aerobic metabolism and enhanced severe-intensity cycling performance after IPC. Furthermore, the delayed exhaustion after IPC under lower RPE and higher skeletal muscle activation suggest they have a role on the ergogenic effects of IPC on endurance performance.

The present study aimed to analyze and compare the effects of four different interval-training protocols on aerobic fitness and muscle strength. Thirty-seven subjects (23.8 ± 4 years; 171.7 ± 9.5 cm; 70 ± 11 kg) were assigned to one of four groups: low-intensity interval training with (BFR, n = 10) or without (LOW, n = 7) blood flow restriction, high-intensity interval training (HIT, n = 10), and combined HIT and BFR (BFR + HIT, n = 10, every session performed 50% as BFR and 50% as HIT). Before and after 4 weeks training (3 days a week), the maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max ), maximal power output (Pmax ), onset blood lactate accumulation (OBLA), and muscle strength were measured for all subjects. All training groups were able to improve OBLA (BFR, 16%; HIT, 25%; HIT + BFR, 22%; LOW, 6%), with no difference between groups. However, VO2max and Pmax improved only for BFR (6%, 12%), HIT (9%, 15%) and HIT + BFR (6%, 11%), with no difference between groups. Muscle strength gains were only observed after BFR training (11%). This study demonstrates the advantage of short-term low-intensity interval BFR training as the single mode of training able to simultaneously improve aerobic fitness and muscular strength.

Explosive training and heavy weight training are effective concurrent training methods aiming to improve RE within a few weeks. However, long-term training programs seem to be necessary when the largest possible improvement in RE is desired.

The aims of this study were: (1) to verify the validity of previous proposed models to estimate the lowest exercise duration (TLOW) and the highest intensity (IHIGH) at which VO2max is reached (2) to test the hypothesis that parameters involved in these models, and hence the validity of these models are affected by aerobic training status. Thirteen cyclists (EC), eleven runners (ER) and ten untrained (U) subjects performed several cycle-ergometer exercise tests to fatigue in order to determine and estimate TLOW (ETLOW) and I HIGH (EIHIGH). The relationship between the time to achieved VO2max and time to exhaustion (Tlim) was used to estimate ETLOW. EIHIGH was estimated using the critical power model. IHIGH was assumed as the highest intensity at which VO2 was equal or higher than the average of VO2max values minus one typical error. TLOW was considered Tlim associated with IHIGH. No differences were found in TLOW between ER (170 +/- 31 s) and U (209 +/- 29 s), however, both showed higher values than EC (117 +/- 29 s). IHIGH was similar between U (269 +/- 73 W) and ER (319 +/- 50 W), and both were lower than EC (451 +/- 33 W). EI HIGH was similar and significantly correlated with IHIGH only in U (r = 0.87) and ER (r = 0.62). ETLOW and TLOW were different only for U and not significantly correlated in all groups. These data suggest that the aerobic training status affects the validity of the proposed models for estimating IHIGH.