Hypotensive effects of resistance exercise with continuous and intermittent blood flow restriction

Abstract

Abstract--The aim of this study was to compare the acute effects of low-intensity (LI) resistance exercise (RE) with continuous blood flow restriction (CBFR) and intermittent blood flow restriction (IBFR) on systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP). After a one-repetition maximum test, 10 normotensive recreationally trained men performed three experimental protocols. In the three RE protocols, increases in SBP, DBP, and MAP were observed immediately after exercise, but the effect sizes (ESs) were greater for the LI + CBFR and high-intensity protocols. There were hypotensive effects on SBP, DBP, and MAP in all three protocols; however, the effects on MAP lasted longer for the LI + IBFR and LI + CBFR protocols. These long-lasting hypotensive effects on DBP and MAP occurred in all three protocols. Thus, we conclude that the post exercise hypotensive effects on SBP, DBP, and MAP appear to occur in all three RE protocols, with the effect on SBP being longer in the LI + IBFR and LI + CBFR protocols.

Low‐intensity resistance exercise with blood flow restriction and arterial stiffness in humans: A systematic review

“…Only one study 19 included in our systematic review utilized an intermittent application approach, whereas all other studies had the BFR application on continuously 20‐23 . Intermittent application involves deflation of the cuffs during the intra‐exercise rest period when multiple sets of exercise are performed and may be an alternative approach for individuals with medical risk factors to obtain the benefits of LIRE‐BFR exercise without the heightened cardiovascular and hemodynamic responses 48 . A single study showed that maintaining cuff pressure during the rest periods significantly increased post‐exercise release of noradrenaline as well as brachial measures of blood pressure using a failure‐type leg extension LIRE‐BFR protocol, although the loads (20% 1RM vs. 40% 1RM) and cuff type (Hokanson vs. KAATSU) were different 49 from those of Figueroa et al 19 As intra‐exercise brachial systolic and diastolic blood pressures are heightened in a continuous application mode compared with the same exercise performed without blood flow restriction, 15 intermittent application may be a suitable strategy to reduce cardiovascular and hemodynamic stress 48 …”

Effects of strength training with continuous or intermittent blood flow restriction on the hypertrophy, muscular strength and endurance of men

“…Among the studies that evaluated the application of BFR, only one study analyzed muscle strength and hypertrophy (Fitschen et al, 2014); however, this study used only one exercise with unilateral and single-joint execution. Although some studies have shown no significant differences between continuous and intermittent BFR in the muscle strength and hypertrophy of lower limbs (Fitschen et al, 2014), the muscle activation of the upper limbs (Yasuda et al, 2013) and the hemodynamics of the upper limbs (Neto et al, 2016a;2017b), the best strategy for ST sessions combined with BFR (continuous or intermittent) with the aim of increasing muscle hypertrophy (MH), dynamic muscular strength (DMS), isometric muscle strength (IMS) and localized muscle endurance (LME) of the upper limbs has still not been defined.…”

“…This method has been used to increase muscle hypertrophy (Laurentino et al, 2012;Vechin et al, 2015), muscle strength (Laurentino et al, 2012;Silva et al, 2015;Vechin et al, 2015;Sousa et al, 2017) and localized muscle endurance (LME) (Kacin & Strazar, 2011;Gil et al, 2017;Sousa et al, 2017). In addition, it has been used to increase functional capacity (Araujo et al, 2015) and isometric force (Chaves et al, 2016) and has been shown to be safe in relation to hemodynamics (Araújo et al, 2014;Neto et al, 2015;2016a;2016b;Vilaça-Alves et al, 2016;Neto et al, 2017a;2017b).…”

“…In recent years, this method of ST has gained more notoriety in the scientific community; thus, several studies have been developed with the aim of understanding all of the procedures inherent to its application, with respect to safety, efficacy and adherence. As an example, one can observe the intensity of the load used (Suga et al, 2010), the cuff size (Rossow et al, 2012), the pressure used (Sumide, Sakuraba, Sawaki, Ohmura, & Tamura, 2009) and the form of application of BFR (continuous or intermittent) (Suga et al, 2012;Yasuda, Loenneke, Ogasawara, & Abe, 2013;Fitschen et al, 2014;Brandner, Kidgell, & Warmington, 2015;Neto et al, 2016a;2017b;2018). Among the studies that evaluated the application of BFR, only one study analyzed muscle strength and hypertrophy (Fitschen et al, 2014); however, this study used only one exercise with unilateral and single-joint execution.…”

“…Thus, upon reviewing the relevant literature, it was observed that continuous BFR promotes higher metabolic stress compared with intermittent BFR (Suga et al, 2012), further increasing the sensation of pain during the exercise sessions (Fitschen et al, 2014), which allows the increase in hemodynamics (Neto et al, 2016a;2017a;2017b). This effect may influence training adherence for people with special needs; however, studies analyzing ST sessions with BFR (continuous or intermittent) with apparently healthy people are needed, followed by studies with special populations.…”