Key result
Low-load dynamic handgrip training with blood flow restriction increased resting, peak, and maximal brachial artery diameter by 3.0%, 2.4%, and 3.1% respectively, with no change in function.
Why the study?
Does dynamic low-load handgrip training with blood flow restriction alter brachial artery function and structure compared to nonrestricted training in healthy men?
RCT (n=9)
Counterbalanced
Does dynamic low-load handgrip training with blood flow restriction alter brachial artery function and structure compared to nonrestricted training in healthy men?
Low-load handgrip training with blood flow restriction induces transient structural adaptations in the conduit artery without altering endothelial function.
Caution against assuming endothelial benefits from BFR handgrip training; leaves open durability and relevance of modest diameter changes in healthy adults.
Low load resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) can increase muscle size and strength, but the implications on the conduit artery are uncertain. We examined the effects of low-load dynamic handgrip training with and without BFR, and detraining, on measures of brachial artery function and structure. Nine male participants (26 ± 4 yr, 178 ± 3 cm, 78 ± 10 kg) completed 4 wk (3 days/wk) of dynamic handgrip training at 40% 1 repetition maximum (1RM). In a counterbalanced manner, one forearm trained under BFR (occlusion cuff at 80 mmHg) and the other under nonrestricted (CON) conditions. Brachial artery function [flow-mediated dilation (FMD)] and structure (diameter) were assessed using Doppler ultrasound. Measurements were made before training (pretraining), after training (posttraining), and after 2-wk no training (detraining). Brachial artery diameter at rest, in response to 5-min ischemia (peak diameter), and ischemic exercise (maximal diameter) increased by 3.0%, 2.4%, and 3.1%, respectively, after BFR training but not after CON. FMD did not change at any time point in either arm. Vascular measures in the BFR arm returned to baseline after 2 wk detraining with no change after CON. The data demonstrate that dynamic low-load handgrip training with BFR induced transient adaptations to conduit artery structure but not function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hunt et al. (2011) reported an RCT. Low-load dynamic handgrip training with blood flow restriction (BFR) vs. Nonrestricted (CON) low-load dynamic handgrip training was evaluated on Brachial artery function (flow-mediated dilation) and structure (diameter). Low-load dynamic handgrip training with blood flow restriction increased resting, peak, and maximal brachial artery diameter by 3.0%, 2.4%, and 3.1% respectively, with no change in function.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: