Recovery After High-Intensity Intermittent Exercise in Elite Soccer Players Using VEINOPLUS Sport Technology for Blood-Flow Stimulation

Abstract

Context Electric muscle stimulation has been suggested to enhance recovery after exhaustive exercise by inducing an increase in blood flow to the stimulated area. Previous studies have failed to support this hypothesis. We hypothesized that the lack of effect shown in previous studies could be attributed to the technique or device used. Objective To investigate the effectiveness of a recovery intervention using an electric blood-flow stimulator on anaerobic performance and muscle damage in professional soccer players after intermittent, exhaustive exercise. Design Randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting National Institute of Sport, Expertise, and Performance (INSEP). Patients or Other Participants Twenty-six healthy professional male soccer players. Intervention(s) The athletes performed an intermittent fatiguing exercise followed by a 1-hour recovery period, either passive or using an electric blood-flow stimulator (VEINOPLUS). Participants were randomly assigned to a group before the experiment started. Main Outcome Measures(s) Performances during a 30-second all-out exercise test, maximal vertical countermovement jump, and maximal voluntary contraction of the knee extensor muscles were measured at rest, immediately after the exercise, and 1 hour and 24 hours later. Muscle enzymes indicating muscle damage (creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase) and hematologic profiles were analyzed before and 1 hour and 24 hours after the intermittent fatigue exercise. Results The electric-stimulation group had better 30-second all-out performances at 1 hour after exercise (P = .03) in comparison with the passive-recovery group. However, no differences were observed in muscle damage markers, maximal vertical countermovement jump, or maximal voluntary contraction between groups (P > .05). Conclusions Compared with passive recovery, electric stimulation using this blood-flow stimulator improved anaerobic performance at 1 hour postintervention. No changes in muscle damage markers or maximal voluntary contraction were detected. These responses may be considered beneficial for athletes engaged in sports with successive rounds interspersed with short, passive recovery periods.

Iron status markers are only transiently affected by a football game

“…In this study, participants played the experimental game one week following the completion of their regular season but red blood cell count, HGB and haematocrit values remained within the physiological range. Bieuzen, Pournot, Roulland, and Hausswirth (2012) applied a fatiguing intermittent exercise protocol to professional football players in an attempt to simulate game-induced metabolic and local muscular fatigue and, in line with our results, found no alterations of RBC, HGB and haematocrit either 1 h or 24 h postexercise. In contrast, RBC, HGB and haematocrit did increase by 5-6% immediately after an acute bout of resistance exercise, but this rise was associated with a 10% decline in plasma volume (Ahmadizad & El-Sayed, 2005).…”

Countermovement Jump Recovery in Professional Soccer Players Using an Inertial Sensor

“…Performance during CMJ tests has also been assessed using inertial devices that measure 47 vertical acceleration. [15][16][17][18] In addition to providing a measure of jump height, these devices can 48…”

Low‐frequency electrical stimulation combined with a cooling vest improves recovery of elite kayakers following a simulated 1000‐m race in a hot environment

“…However, in the heat, active recovery can elicit sustained cardiovascular and thermoregulatory strains, as the muscles continue to work and therefore to produce metabolic heat (De Pauw et al., ). Recently, low‐frequency electrical stimulation (LFES) has been investigated as an alternative to active recovery (Bieuzen et al., ). The physiologic rationale for using LFES during recovery from exercise is to increase blood flow in the muscles.…”

“…This is achieved when LFES is applied at intensities sufficient to initiate a low‐intensity, involuntary, repetitive mechanical contraction–relaxation cycle. Results from recent studies suggest that increased systemic blood flow following LFES is beneficial to performance restoration after a short‐term recovery, in a temperate environment (Bieuzen et al., , ; Finberg et al., ). By being a non‐active strategy, using LFES after exercise in a hot environment could limit heat development and may even enhance conductive and evaporative cooling by maximizing peripheral blood flow, and consequently, improve recovery in athletes.…”