Similar Neuromuscular and Morphological Adaptations Following Short-Term Blood Flow Restriction and Traditional Resistance Training in Young Men

Abstract Pennartz, KJ, Smith, CD, Washington, S, Gebert, R, Wolfe, A, Keller, JL, and Luera, MJ. Similar neuromuscular and morphological adaptations following short-term blood flow restriction and traditional resistance training in young men. J Strength Cond Res 39(12): 1262–1268, 2025—The purpose of this study was to evaluate changes in muscular strength and size, as well as electrical efficiency (EE), in response to either 4 weeks of low-load blood flow restriction (BFR) or low-load non-BFR resistance training in young, healthy men. Twenty-one untrained men completed a 4-week randomized, between-group parallel training intervention consisting of 4 sets (1 × 30, 3 × 15) of repeated isokinetic (60°·s −1 ) ankle dorsiflexions at 30% of peak torque with BFR or without BFR at 40% arterial occlusion pressure. Muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA), isokinetic and isometric strength, and EE were assessed pretraining and posttraining. A p -value ≤0.05 was considered significant. Separate mixed factorial ANOVAs (group × time) were used to test mean differences. Muscle strength did not change in the BFR or non-BFR group ( p > 0.05; = 0.06); however, mCSA increased to a similar extent in both groups ( p < 0.01; = 0.72). Neither training approach induced a change in EE ( p > 0.05; = 0.001). Based on these results, low-load resistance training with BFR may not lead to unique or enhanced muscular adaptations, especially in the tibialis anterior, possibly due to musculotendinous mechanical properties and other factors. Furthermore, BFR may reverse the expected order of resistance training-induced adaptations (i.e., neural then hypertrophy) by accelerating metabolite buildup, as evidenced by the increase in mCSA without increases in strength or neuromuscular adaptations. Strength and conditioning professionals seeking to improve dynamic ankle dorsiflexion in young, healthy men may not find additional benefits when applying BFR in a short-term intervention.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Published
2025-08-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000005231
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

Similar Neuromuscular and Morphological Adaptations Following Short-Term Blood Flow Restriction and Traditional Resistance Training in Young Men

Calvin Smith, Joshua L. Keller, Micheal J. Luera, Kase J. Pennartz et al.
1 links
The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
article

Similar Neuromuscular and Morphological Adaptations Following Short-Term Blood Flow Restriction and Traditional Resistance Training in Young Men

Calvin Smith, Joshua L. Keller, Micheal J. Luera, Kase J. Pennartz, Sierra M. Washington, Andrew Wolfe, Renee Gebert
article en

Abstract

Abstract Pennartz, KJ, Smith, CD, Washington, S, Gebert, R, Wolfe, A, Keller, JL, and Luera, MJ. Similar neuromuscular and morphological adaptations following short-term blood flow restriction and traditional resistance training in young men. J Strength Cond Res 39(12): 1262–1268, 2025—The purpose of this study was to evaluate changes in muscular strength and size, as well as electrical efficiency (EE), in response to either 4 weeks of low-load blood flow restriction (BFR) or low-load non-BFR resistance training in young, healthy men. Twenty-one untrained men completed a 4-week randomized, between-group parallel training intervention consisting of 4 sets (1 × 30, 3 × 15) of repeated isokinetic (60°·s −1 ) ankle dorsiflexions at 30% of peak torque with BFR or without BFR at 40% arterial occlusion pressure. Muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA), isokinetic and isometric strength, and EE were assessed pretraining and posttraining. A p -value ≤0.05 was considered significant. Separate mixed factorial ANOVAs (group × time) were used to test mean differences. Muscle strength did not change in the BFR or non-BFR group ( p > 0.05; = 0.06); however, mCSA increased to a similar extent in both groups ( p < 0.01; = 0.72). Neither training approach induced a change in EE ( p > 0.05; = 0.001). Based on these results, low-load resistance training with BFR may not lead to unique or enhanced muscular adaptations, especially in the tibialis anterior, possibly due to musculotendinous mechanical properties and other factors. Furthermore, BFR may reverse the expected order of resistance training-induced adaptations (i.e., neural then hypertrophy) by accelerating metabolite buildup, as evidenced by the increase in mCSA without increases in strength or neuromuscular adaptations. Strength and conditioning professionals seeking to improve dynamic ankle dorsiflexion in young, healthy men may not find additional benefits when applying BFR in a short-term intervention.

The Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchVol. 39(12)
University of North Texas (US), Syracuse University (US), Tarleton State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
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.