Cross-transfer Effects On Muscle Strength, Size, And Quality Following Unilateral Blood Flow Restriction Training

PURPOSE: Unilateral resistance training (RT) has shown to induce contralateral strength improvements in the untrained homologous muscle. Notably, low-load blood flow restriction (BFR) RT has shown superior increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy compared to low-load non-BFR RT. Previous literature has also reported that BFR RT has systemic cross-transfer effects of strength on other working skeletal muscles compared to low-load non-BFR RT. METHODS: Fourteen untrained participants were randomized into two groups: (BFR; n = 8) (177.6 ± 4.1 cm, 84.8 ± 15.1 kg, 21.3 ± 1 years) or control (non-BFR; n = 6) (173.2 ± 7.5 cm, 77.9 ± 10.3 kg, 23 ± 2.6 years). Subjects completed 4 weeks (8 sessions) of unilateral isokinetic dorsiflexion RT at 30% of their daily peak torque at a velocity of 60°/s. Isokinetic peak torque, echo intensity (EI), and muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) were taken bilaterally pre and post RT. Statistical analyses included 3 separate 3-way mixed factorial ANOVAs (Group [BFR, non-BFR] x Time [pre, post] x Leg [right, left]). RESULTS: For isokinetic strength, there were no significant interactions or main effects (p > .05). For EI, there were no significant interactions (p > .05); however, collapsed across time and leg, there was a significant main effect for group (p = .017; BFR (91.7 ± 1.6), non-BFR (84.8 ± 1.9); mean ± SE). Furthermore, there was no significant interaction for mCSA (p > .05), but there was a significant main effect for time (p < .001; pre (6.9 ± .26) to post (7.5 ± .26)) and a significant main effect for leg (p < .001; right (7.5 ± .26), left (6.8 ± .26)). CONCLUSIONS: The BFR group was found to have elevated echo intensity values throughout the intervention, yet there was no RT-induced change in muscle quality. Interestingly, low-load RT with and without BFR induced hypertrophy in both the trained and untrained legs without increases in isokinetic dorsiflexion strength. President's Excellence in Research Scholars Internal Grant

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001059844.26802.30
Primary Topic
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cross-transfer Effects On Muscle Strength, Size, And Quality Following Unilateral Blood Flow Restriction Training

Calvin Smith, Amber L. Harris Bozer, Joshua L. Keller, Micheal J. Luera et al.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
article

Cross-transfer Effects On Muscle Strength, Size, And Quality Following Unilateral Blood Flow Restriction Training

Calvin Smith, Amber L. Harris Bozer, Joshua L. Keller, Micheal J. Luera, Kase J. Pennartz, Dakota R. Harris, Sierra M. Washington, Lindsay K. Rankin
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: Unilateral resistance training (RT) has shown to induce contralateral strength improvements in the untrained homologous muscle. Notably, low-load blood flow restriction (BFR) RT has shown superior increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy compared to low-load non-BFR RT. Previous literature has also reported that BFR RT has systemic cross-transfer effects of strength on other working skeletal muscles compared to low-load non-BFR RT. METHODS: Fourteen untrained participants were randomized into two groups: (BFR; n = 8) (177.6 ± 4.1 cm, 84.8 ± 15.1 kg, 21.3 ± 1 years) or control (non-BFR; n = 6) (173.2 ± 7.5 cm, 77.9 ± 10.3 kg, 23 ± 2.6 years). Subjects completed 4 weeks (8 sessions) of unilateral isokinetic dorsiflexion RT at 30% of their daily peak torque at a velocity of 60°/s. Isokinetic peak torque, echo intensity (EI), and muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) were taken bilaterally pre and post RT. Statistical analyses included 3 separate 3-way mixed factorial ANOVAs (Group [BFR, non-BFR] x Time [pre, post] x Leg [right, left]). RESULTS: For isokinetic strength, there were no significant interactions or main effects (p > .05). For EI, there were no significant interactions (p > .05); however, collapsed across time and leg, there was a significant main effect for group (p = .017; BFR (91.7 ± 1.6), non-BFR (84.8 ± 1.9); mean ± SE). Furthermore, there was no significant interaction for mCSA (p > .05), but there was a significant main effect for time (p < .001; pre (6.9 ± .26) to post (7.5 ± .26)) and a significant main effect for leg (p < .001; right (7.5 ± .26), left (6.8 ± .26)). CONCLUSIONS: The BFR group was found to have elevated echo intensity values throughout the intervention, yet there was no RT-induced change in muscle quality. Interestingly, low-load RT with and without BFR induced hypertrophy in both the trained and untrained legs without increases in isokinetic dorsiflexion strength. President's Excellence in Research Scholars Internal Grant

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
Tarleton State University (US), University of South Alabama (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.