Effects of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation on the Energy-Restriction-Induced Reduction of Muscle Mass During Intended Weight Loss

Abstract

Purpose: Overweight and obesity are an increasing problem worldwide. However, most studies that focus on weight reduction by energy restriction and/or aerobic exercise reported considerable loss of muscle mass as well. Increased protein intake and/or resistance exercise might inhibit this detrimental effect during a negative energy balance. Whole-body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS), a time effective, joint-friendly, and highly customizable training technology, showed similar hypertrophic effects compared with high-intensity resistance training. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of WB-EMS on body composition during negative energy balance with maintained/increased protein intake in overweight premenopausal women. Patients and Methods: Ninety premenopausal, 25–50-year-old, overweight women were randomly assigned to three groups ( n = 30 each). (1) Negative energy balance (−500 kcal/day) by energy restriction with compensatory protein intake (CG). (2) Negative energy balance (−500 kcal/day) by energy restriction (−250 kcal/day) and increased physical activity (−250 kcal/day) with increased protein intake (PA). (3) Negative energy balance (−500 kcal/day) due to energy restriction and increased physical activity with increased protein intake plus WB-EMS. The duration of the intervention was 16 weeks. Participants underwent restrictions in kcal per days and supplementation of protein (CG: 1.2 or PA/WB-EMS: 1.7 g/kg body mass/day) where needed. Bipolar WB-EMS was applied 1.5× week for 20 min (85 Hz; 350 μs; intermittent 6 s impulse, 4 s rest; rectangular). The primary study endpoint “lean body mass” (LBM) and secondary endpoint body fat mass (BFM) were assessed by bio-impedance analysis (BIA). Results: LBM decreased in the CG and PA group (CG: −113 ± 1,872 g; PA: −391 ± 1,832 g) but increased in the WB-EMS group (387 ± 1,769 g). However, changes were not significant ( p > 0.05). Comparing the groups by ANOVA, no significant differences were observed ( p = 0.070). However, pairwise adjusted comparisons determined significant differences between WB-EMS and PA ( p = 0.049). BFM decreased significantly ( p < 0.001) in all groups (CG: −2,174 ± 4,331 g; PA: −3,743 ± 4,237 g; WB-EMS: −3,278 ± 4,023 g) without any significant difference between the groups (ANOVA: p = 0.131). Conclusion: WB-EMS is an efficient, joint-friendly, and highly customizable training technology for maintaining muscle mass during energy restriction and can thus be considered as an alternative to more demanding resistance exercise protocols.

Whole-body Electromyostimulation plus Caloric Restriction in Metabolic Syndrome

“…Accordingly, previous reports have shown increased total energy expenditure with a single intense WB-EMS exercise [31] and improved sum of skinfolds and waist circumference in post-menopausal women trained with WB-EMS for 14 weeks [32], so that a partial contribution of WB-EMS to metabolic status in our study is not to exclude. However, subjects trained with WB-EMS did not lose more fat mass than with diet alone, suggesting that metabolic benefits of WB-EMS are primarily attributable to maintenance of muscle mass during food intake restriction [10,11,33]. These findings are also in line with previous studies on WB-EMS in elderly individuals with sarcopenic obesity [10][11][12][13], whilst should be confirmed by estimations of fat-free mass more appropriate than those we obtained with DSM-BIA.…”

Efficacy of Whole-Body Electromyostimulation (WB-EMS) on Body Composition and Muscle Strength in Non-athletic Adults. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…In a recent study not included here, 9 Willert et al (2019) focused (also) on the maintenance of muscle mass during 16 weeks of negative energy balance (-500 kcal/d) in overweight-obese premenopausal women applying WB-EMS and protein supplementation. Leaving aside differences with respect to study duration (16 vs. 26 weeks) and weekly WB-EMS volume (30 vs. 40 min), the WB-EMS protocol and assessment (DSM-BIA, InBody 770, Seoul Korea) of both studies were largely comparable, but the effect sizes determined by Willert et al (2019) were much lower compared to the study of Bellia et al (2020) (SMD: 2.34 vs. 0.27). In contrast, the study of Ricci et al (2020), which also focused on weight reduction, albeit by bariatric surgery, was the only study to report tendentially negative effects of WB-EMS on muscle mass.…”

“…2 At least when applying the more popular concept with low to negligible workloads. Kemmler et al, 2014;Schink et al, 2018;Weissenfels et al, 2018;Jee, 2019;Ludwig et al, 2019;Willert et al, 2019;Bellia et al, 2020;Ricci et al, 2020). However, in order to generate decisive evidence, a meta-analysis was seen as the most adequate study type (Kemmler et al, 2020a).…”

Muskuläre Belastung unterschiedlicher Ganzkörper-Elektromyostimulations-(WB-EMS) Protokolle – eine Crossover-Untersuchung mit Sportlern ohne WB-EMS Erfahrung

“…Die WB-EMS Applikation ist dabei lediglich als zusätzlicher Stimulus zur Belastungserhöhung zu sehen. Eine Kombination beider oben genannten WB-EMS Methodenvarianten findet überwiegend im Bereich des Gewichtsmanagements Anwendung [4]. Da dieses kombinierte Training meist mehrmals je Woche eingesetzt wird und die Problematik hoher CK-und Myoglobin-Konzentration nach WB-EMS Applikation trotz intensiver Beforschung (u. a.…”

“…Wie erwähnt quittierte keiner der Teilnehmer die Studie, alle Teilnehmer gaben an, die Studie absolut protokollgemäß absolviert zu haben 4 . Die Analyse der Testcompliance ergab eine sehr hohe Übereinstimmung der berichteten subjektiven Belastung mit den Intensitätsvorgaben für die WB-EMS Applikation (▶tab.…”