Local and Remote Ischemic Preconditioning Improves Sprint Interval Exercise Performance in Team Sport Athletes

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of local (LIPC) and remote (RIPC) ischemic preconditioning on sprint interval exercise (SIE) performance. Fifteen male collegiate basketball players underwent a LIPC, RIPC, sham (SHAM), or control (CON) trial before conducting six sets of a 30-s Wingate-based SIE test. The oxygen uptake and heart rate were continuously measured during SIE test. The total work in the LIPC (+2.2%) and RIPC (+2.5%) conditions was significantly higher than that in the CON condition (p < 0.05). The mean power output (MPO) at the third and fourth sprint in the LIPC (+4.5%) and RIPC (+4.9%) conditions was significantly higher than that in the CON condition (p < 0.05). The percentage decrement score for MPO in the LIPC and RIPC condition was significantly lower than that in the CON condition (p < 0.05). No significant interaction effects were found in pH and blood lactate concentrations. There were no significant differences in the accumulated exercise time at ≥80%, 90%, and 100% of maximal oxygen uptake during SIE. Overall, both LIPC and RIPC could improve metabolic efficiency and performance during SIE in athletes.

Effects of Ischemic Preconditioning on Aerobic Capacity in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…athletes in studies). Twelve studies only included male participants [10,13,15,19,20,[30][31][32][33][34][35][36], seven studies included both male and female participants [37][38][39][40][41][42][43], and sex information was missing in one study [44].…”

“…In sixteen studies the IPC intervention group received a cuff pressure of 220 mmHg to block blood ow, one study conducted 250 mmHg [15], one study conducted 191 ± 20mmHg [37], one study conducted a pressure above 300 mmHg [34], and one study conducted 50 mmHg above the systolic blood pressure of participants [36]. The control group received no intervention or placebo control (two studies conducted sham ultrasound treatment [37,42], one study conducted IPC at a cuff pressure of 10 mmHg below the level of diastolic blood pressure as a placebo control [36], and the remaining studies conducted IPC at a cuff pressure of 20 to 50 mmHg as a placebo control), and ve studies conducted both placebo and no intervention as controls [30,[35][36][37]42].…”

“…(5 min arterial occlusion, 5 min without arterial occlusion) (n = 13) [10,13,15,19,30,32,33,35,37,40,[42][43][44], eight cycles of ischemia-reperfusion (5 min arterial occlusion, 5 min without arterial occlusion) (n = 1) [44].…”

“…Additionally, six studies conducted the running GXT [10,13,32,35,39,42], and seven studies conducted the cycling GXT [15,30,31,33,34,37,38].…”

Effects of Recurring IPC vs. rIPC Maneuvers on Exercise Performance, Pulse Wave Velocity, and Red Blood Cell Deformability: Special Consideration of Reflow Varieties

“…Positive effects of (r)IPC on exercise performance were related to a promoted phosphocreatine resynthesis, improved functioning of the mitochondrial ATP-dependent potassium channels, attenuated ATP depletion, enhanced metabolic efficiency, and increased vasodilation by the above-mentioned NO-dependent pathways. Thus, oxygen delivery and extraction were enhanced, and subsequent physical performance was ameliorated [ 20 , 21 ]. The remaining heterogeneity of the results might be explained by the differences in the reported study settings, including variations in the number of applied I/R cycles, the applied pressure within the blood pressure cuff, the application site (arm(s) or leg(s) or both), the study cohort, and the associated performance test [ 16 , 17 , 18 ].…”