Key result
Load and blood flow restriction do not elicit meaningful differences in the acute muscular response of chest press exercise when taken to volitional failure.
Why the study?
Does load and blood flow restriction alter the acute muscular and cardiovascular response to chest press exercise taken to failure in young men?
RCT (n=12)
Randomized
No
Does load and blood flow restriction alter the acute muscular and cardiovascular response to chest press exercise taken to failure in young men?
Load and blood flow restriction do not elicit meaningful differences in the acute muscular response of chest press exercise taken to failure.
No meaningful acute differences with load or BFR to failure; leaves open chronic adaptations or cardiovascular effects.
To determine the effects of load and blood flow restriction (BFR) on muscular responses, we asked 12 participants to perform chest presses under four different conditions [30/0, 30/40, 50/0, and 50/40, presented as percentage one-repetition maximum (1RM)/percentage arterial occlusion pressure (AOP)]. Muscle thickness increased pre- to post-exercise [chest: mean 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21, 0.37 cm; triceps: mean 0.44, 95% CI 0.34, 0.54 cm], remaining elevated for 15 min post-exercise. Electromyography amplitude was greater with 50% 1RM and increased over time for the first three repetitions of each set of chest presses. The last three repetitions differed across time only. AOP increased from pre- to post-exercise, augmented by BFR [30/0: mean 31, 95% CI 18, 44 mmHg; 30/40: mean 39, 95% CI 28, 50 mmHg; 50/0: mean 32, 95% CI 23, 41 mmHg; 50/40: mean 46, 95% CI 32, 59 mmHg). Tranquility decreased and physical exhaustion increased from the pre- to post-condition, with both parameters returning to the baseline 15 min post-exercise level. In conclusion, load and BFR do not elicit meaningful differences in the acute response of chest press exercise taken to failure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jessee et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in Healthy resistance-trained individuals (n=12). Blood flow restriction (BFR) with low or moderate load vs. No BFR (0% arterial occlusion pressure) with 30% or 50% 1RM was evaluated on Change in chest muscle thickness pre- to post-exercise (main effect of time across all conditions) (mean 0.29 cm, 95% CI 0.21, 0.37, p=<0.001). Load and blood flow restriction do not elicit meaningful differences in the acute muscular response of chest press exercise when taken to volitional failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: