No ergogenic effect of ischemic preconditioning applied 5 or 30 min before maximal self-paced cycling exercise

Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) is a potential ergogenic technique but the response rates vary considerably in the literature. The use of markedly different IPC protocols among the published literature, including pressure, rounds of ischemia, and time latencies potentially contribute to heterogenous responses. This study investigated whether the duration of time between the application of IPC and the commencement of exercise may explain equivocal ergogenic results. Fourteen (<i>n</i> = 11 male, <i>n</i> = 3 female) moderately trained volunteers participated in a familiarization and three experimental trials: no IPC (CON), IPC-5 (4 × 5 min IPC applied 5 min before exercise), and IPC-30 (4 × 5 min IPC applied 30 min before exercise). Participants completed maximal 10-min accumulated work (kJ) cycling time trials. Oxygen uptake (<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:mover><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mtext>O2</mml:mtext></mml:mrow></mml:math>), heart rate, vastus lateralis tissue oxygenation, and blood lactate concentrations ([La^-]_b) were measured before, during, and after exercise. There were no differences in performance or physiological responses during or after exercise among CON, IPC-5, and IPC-30. These findings add further evidence to the existing literature reporting that IPC-related ergogenicity is equivocal when administered 5 or 30 min before exercise. These results reinforce the requirement to clarify whether there exists an IPC protocol that reliably elicits an ergogenic effect.