Low intensity blood flow restriction training: a meta-analysis
- 7k Downloads
The primary objective of this investigation was to quantitatively identify which training variables result in the greatest strength and hypertrophy outcomes with lower body low intensity training with blood flow restriction (LI-BFR). Searches were performed for published studies with certain criteria. First, the primary focus of the study must have compared the effects of low intensity endurance or resistance training alone to low intensity exercise with some form of blood flow restriction. Second, subject populations had to have similar baseline characteristics so that valid outcome measures could be made. Finally, outcome measures had to include at least one measure of muscle hypertrophy. All studies included in the analysis utilized MRI except for two which reported changes via ultrasound. The mean overall effect size (ES) for muscle strength for LI-BFR was 0.58 [95% CI: 0.40, 0.76], and 0.00 [95% CI: −0.18, 0.17] for low intensity training. The mean overall ES for muscle hypertrophy for LI-BFR training was 0.39 [95% CI: 0.35, 0.43], and −0.01 [95% CI: −0.05, 0.03] for low intensity training. Blood flow restriction resulted in significantly greater gains in strength and hypertrophy when performed with resistance training than with walking. In addition, performing LI-BFR 2–3 days per week resulted in the greatest ES compared to 4–5 days per week. Significant correlations were found between ES for strength development and weeks of duration, but not for muscle hypertrophy. This meta-analysis provides insight into the impact of different variables on muscular strength and hypertrophy to LI-BFR training.
KeywordsKAATSU Hypertrophy Strength Vascular occlusion training
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflict of interest.
- Abe T, Fujita S, Nakajima T, Sakamaki M, Ozaki H, Ogasawara R, Sugaya M, Kurano M, Yasuda T, Sato Y, Ohshima H, Mukai C, Ishii N (2010a) Effects of low-intensity cycle training with restricted leg blood flow on thigh muscle volume and VO2max in young men. J sports Sci Med 9:452–458Google Scholar
- ACSM (2009) American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41(3):687–708Google Scholar
- Clark BC, Manini TM, Hoffman RL, Williams PS, Guiler MK, Knutson MJ, McGlynn ML, Kushnick MR (2010) Relative safety of 4 weeks of blood flow-restricted resistance exercise in young, healthy adults. Scand J Med Sci Sports. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01100
- Gualano B, Neves M Jr, Lima FR, Pinto AL, Laurentino G, Borges C, Baptista L, Artioli GG, Aoki MS, Moriscot A, Lancha AH Jr, Bonfa E, Ugrinowitsch C (2010) Resistance training with vascular occlusion in inclusion body myositis: a case study. Med Sci Sports Exerc 42(2):250–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ivey FM, Roth SM, Ferrell RE, Tracy BL, Lemmer JT, Hurlbut DE, Martel GF, Siegel EL, Fozard JL, Jeffrey Metter E, Fleg JL, Hurley BF (2000) Effects of age, gender, and myostatin genotype on the hypertrophic response to heavy resistance strength training. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 55(11):M641–M648PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kacin A, Strazar K (2011) Frequent low-load ischemic resistance exercise to failure enhances muscle oxygen delivery and endurance capacity. Scand J Med Sci Sports. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01260.x
- Karabulut M, Bemben DA, Sherk VD, Anderson MA, Abe T, Bemben MG (2011) Effects of high-intensity resistance training and low-intensity resistance training with vascular restriction on bone markers in older men. Eur J Appl Physiol. doi: 10.1007/s00421-010-1796-9
- Krieger JW (2010) Single vs. multiple sets of resistance exercise for muscle hypertrophy: a meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 24 (4):1150–1159Google Scholar
- Yasuda T, Ogasawara R, Sakamaki M, Ozaki H, Sato Y, Abe T (2011) Combined effects of low-intensity blood flow restriction training and high-intensity resistance training on muscle strength and size. Eur J Appl Physiol. doi: 10.1007/s00421-011-1873-8