Acute cardiovascular response to unilateral, bilateral, and alternating resistance exercise with blood flow restriction

Stanford, Daphney M.; Park, Joonsun; Credeur, Daniel P.; McCoy, Stephanie M.; Jessee, Matthew B.

doi:10.1007/s00421-020-04401-w

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…G*Power (Kiel University, Germany) software 3.1.9.7 calculated a sample size of 20 participants using repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) at α = 0.05 & β = 0.80 to detect an effect size of 0.35 [42]. The power calculation is based on data from Stanford et al [43] using central SBP over time as the dependent variable and it was determined that twenty participants were required for a moderate effect size. To account for the expected attrition rate of 20 %, 25 participants 18-40 years of age of all races and ethnic backgrounds meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria (▶Table 1) were recruited for the study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Autoregulated and Non-Autoregulated Blood Flow Restriction on Acute Arterial Stiffness

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To investigate the acute effects of autoregulated and non-autoregulated applied pressures during blood flow restriction resistance exercise to volitional fatigue on indices of arterial stiffness using the Delfi Personalized Tourniquet System. Following a randomized autoregulated or non-autoregulated blood flow restriction familiarization session, 20 physically active adults (23±5 years; 7 females) participated in 3 randomized treatment-order sessions with autoregulated and non-autoregulated and no blood flow restriction training. Participants performed 4 sets of dumbbell wall squats to failure using 20% of 1 repetition maximum. Blood flow restriction was performed with 60% of supine limb occlusion pressure. Testing before and post-session included an ultrasonic scan of the carotid artery, applanation tonometry, and blood pressure acquisition. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity increased in the non-autoregulated and no blood flow restriction training groups following exercise while carotid-radial pulse wave velocity increased in the no blood flow restriction training group (all p < 0.05). Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity exhibited an interaction effect between autoregulated and non-autoregulated blood flow restriction in favor of autoregulated blood flow restriction (p < 0.05). Autoregulated blood flow restriction training does not influence indices of arterial stiffness while non-autoregulated and no blood flow restriction training increases central stiffness.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autoregulated and Non-Autoregulated Blood Flow Restriction on Acute Arterial Stiffness

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cuffs were inflated for 8 min and then immediately deflated but remained on the participants legs until the session entirety. Prior research indicated that there are no differences between the use of unilateral and bilateral BFR on cardiovascular response (Stanford et al, 2020).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Lower limb blood flow occlusion increases systemic pressor response without increasing brachial arterial blood flow redistribution in women

Fleming,

MacDonald,

Buckner

et al. 2024

Clin Physio Funct Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to investigate the systemic hemodynamic and vascular changes in women during and after two commonly used clinical blood flow restriction (BFR) pressures at rest. There are minimal data regarding the independent effects of BFR on hemodynamic and systemic vascular changes due to pressor response, particularly among women. Therefore, this study investigated BFR‐induced alterations in pressor response and systemic flow redistribution at rest during two commonly used pressures (50% and 80% limb occlusion pressure [LOP]). Fifteen women (22.1 ± 4.2 years) completed two randomised sessions involving 8‐min of bilateral, lower limb restriction at 50% or 80% LOP followed by 8‐min of recovery post‐deflation. Changes in vascular (arterial diameter [DIA], time‐averaged mean velocity [TAMV], volume flow [VF], and area) and hemodynamic (heart rate [HR] and blood pressure) measures over time (pre‐, during, post‐occlusion) and by session (50% vs. 80% LOP) were tested using repeated measures analysis of variance. Repeated measures correlations (rrm) quantified common intraindividual associations between BFR‐induced hemodynamic and vascular responses. HR increased from baseline during 50% LOP and remained elevated during recovery (p < 0.05). HR increased from baseline during 80% LOP, while tibial VF and TAMV decreased (p < 0.03 for all). HR and TAMV values returned to baseline during recovery, while brachial artery VF decreased (p < 0.05). Changes in HR, brachial VF, and brachial TAMV were similar between 50% and 80% LOP (rrm = 0.32–0.70, p < 0.05 for all). At 80% LOP, changes in HR were positively correlated with brachial VF (rrm = 0.38) and TAMV (rrm = 0.43) and negatively correlated with tibial VF (rrm = −0.36) and TAMV (rrm = −0.30) (p < 0.05 for all). Results suggest that BFR at 80% LOP elicits an acute systemic pressor reflex without concomitant increases in brachial arterial flow, while 50% LOP elicits a subdued response.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the thickness at the cephalic artery level varies minorly, with an average of 9.76% in 2 and 10 cm for the BFR group and in 20 cm for the control group with 10.23% [44]. This difference within the vascular system may be associated with the fact that BFR only acts directly on the arterial system instead of the venous system, hence only improvements in the cephalic artery are observed when used with low-load exercise [65].…”

Section: Hemodynamic Variables and Vascular Calibermentioning

confidence: 98%

Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Functional, Physiological and Structural Variables of Muscle in Patients with Chronic Pathologies: A Systematic Review

Reina-Ruiz

Galán-Mercant

Molina-Torres

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of this systematic review of the current literature is to analyze the changes that blood flow restriction (BFR) causes in subjects with neuro-musculoskeletal and/or systemic pathologies focusing on the following variables: strength, physiological changes, structural changes and cardiocirculatory variables. The search was carried out in seven databases, including randomized clinical trials in which therapeutic exercise was combined with the blood flow restriction tool in populations with musculoskeletal pathologies. Outcome variables are strength, structural changes, physiological changes and cardiocirculatory variables. Twenty studies were included in the present study. Although there is a lot of heterogeneity between the interventions and evaluation instruments, we observed how the restriction of blood flow presents significant differences in the vast majority of the variables analyzed. In addition, we observed how BFR can become a supplement that provides benefits when performed with low intensity, similar to those obtained through high-intensity muscular efforts. The application of the BFR technique can provide benefits in the short and medium term to increase strength, muscle thickness and cardiovascular endurance, even improving the physiological level of the cardiovascular system. In addition, BFR combined with low-load exercises also achieves benefits comparable to high-intensity exercises without the application of BFR, benefiting patients who are unable to lift high loads.

show abstract

Acute cardiovascular response to unilateral, bilateral, and alternating resistance exercise with blood flow restriction

Cited by 7 publications

References 39 publications

Autoregulated and Non-Autoregulated Blood Flow Restriction on Acute Arterial Stiffness

Autoregulated and Non-Autoregulated Blood Flow Restriction on Acute Arterial Stiffness

Lower limb blood flow occlusion increases systemic pressor response without increasing brachial arterial blood flow redistribution in women

Effect of Blood Flow Restriction on Functional, Physiological and Structural Variables of Muscle in Patients with Chronic Pathologies: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About