Remote ischemic preconditioning delays fatigue development during handgrip exercise

Abstract

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) of one or two limbs improves performance of exercise that recruits the same limb(s). However, it is unclear whether IPC application to another limb than that in exercise is also effective and which mechanisms are involved. We investigated the effect of remote IPC (RIPC) on muscle fatigue, time to task failure, forearm hemodynamics, and deoxygenation during handgrip exercise. Thirteen men underwent RIPC in the lower limbs or a control intervention (CON), in random order, and then performed a constant load rhythmic handgrip protocol until task failure. Rates of contraction and relaxation (ΔForce/ΔTime) were used as indices of fatigue. Brachial artery blood flow and conductance, besides forearm microvascular deoxygenation, were assessed during exercise. RIPC attenuated the slowing of contraction and relaxation throughout exercise (P < 0.05 vs CON) and increased time to task failure by 11.2% (95% confidence interval: 0.7-21.7%, P <0.05 vs CON). There was no significant difference in blood flow, conductance, and deoxygenation between conditions throughout exercise (P > 0.05). In conclusion, RIPC applied to the lower limbs delayed the development of fatigue during handgrip exercise, prolonged time to task failure, but was not accompanied by changes in forearm hemodynamics and deoxygenation.

Ischaemic preconditioning does not alter the determinants of endurance running performance in the heat

“…Bailey, Jones, et al (2012) speculated that such changes may increase lactate oxidation in the mitochondria of working skeletal muscles, and/or reflect energy sparing, through augmented mitochondrial flux or increased excitation-contraction coupling efficiency, as has previously been observed in preconditioned pig muscle (Pang et al 1995). Recently, observed improvements in endurance exercise of the forearm suggests such alterations in muscle metabolism may occur without concomitant haemodynamic changes (Barbosa et al 2015). Previously, the improvements to vascular function following IP have been attributed to biochemical changes that follow ATP degradation during periods of occlusion.…”

Ischemic preconditioning: Potential impact on exercise performance and underlying mechanisms

“…Lalonde and Curnier (2015) reported that remote IPC on the arm did not improve exercise performance during the Wingate test 6) . On the other hand, remote IPC on the leg significantly improved time to failure during rhythmic handgrip exercise at an intensity of 4% MVC 23) . Interestingly, despite the significant benefits in exercise tolerance, no differences in physiological variables, such as blood flow, vascular conductance, and muscle deoxygenation profiles, were observed between IPC and CON in the same study 23) .…”

“…In addition to whole body exercise such as cycling, swimming and running, only a comparatively few studies examined the effect of IPC on the performance of local resistance exercise. For example, IPC prolonged the time to failure during rhythmic handgrip at an intensity of 45% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) 23) . Marocolo et al (2016a) also reported that IPC and SHAM conditions resulted in significantly greater repetitions versus the control condition on the first and second sets, but not on the third set during leg extension at a 12 RM load 24) .…”

Remote ischemic preconditioning versus intermittent hypoxia training: a comparative analysis for cardioprotection

“…Another authors have also been looked at RIPC as a means of improving performance in highly trained athletes [71][72][73]. Barbosa [74] testify that RIPC applied to the lower limbs delayed the development of fatigue during handgrip exercise, prolonged time to task failure, but was not accompanied by changes in forearm hemodynamics and deoxygenation.…”