Gungeet Kaur1, Megan Binger1, Claire Evans1, Tiffany Trachte1, Gary P Van Guilder2. 1. Vascular Protection Research Laboratory, Box 2203, Intramural 116, Department of Health and Nutritional Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, 57007, USA. 2. Vascular Protection Research Laboratory, Box 2203, Intramural 116, Department of Health and Nutritional Sciences, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, 57007, USA. gary.vanguilder@sdstate.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Many of the potential performance-enhancing properties of ischemic preconditioning suggest that the oxygen cost for a given endurance exercise workload will be reduced, thereby improving the economy of locomotion. The aim of this study was to identify whether ischemic preconditioning improves exercise economy in recreational runners. METHODS: A randomized sham-controlled crossover study was employed in which 18 adults (age 27 ± 7 years; BMI 24.6 ± 3 kg/m2) completed two, incremental submaximal (65-85% VO2max) treadmill running protocols (3 × 5 min stages from 7.2-14.5 km/h) coupled with indirect calorimetry to assess running economy following ischemic preconditioning (3 × 5 min bilateral upper thigh ischemia) and sham control. Running economy was expressed as mlO2/kg/km and as the energy in kilocalories required to cover 1 km of horizontal distance (kcal/kg/km). RESULTS:Ischemic preconditioning did not influence steady-state heart rate, oxygen consumption, minute ventilation, respiratory exchange ratio, energy expenditure, and blood lactate. Likewise, running economy was similar (P = 0.647) between the sham (from 201.6 ± 17.7 to 204.0 ± 16.1 mlO2/kg/km) and ischemic preconditioning trials (from 202.8 ± 16.2 to 203.1 ± 15.6 mlO2/kg/km). There was no influence (P = 0.21) of ischemic preconditioning on running economy expressed as the caloric unit cost (from 0.96 ± 0.12 to 1.01 ± 0.11 kcal/kg/km) compared with sham (from 1.00 ± 0.10 to 1.00 ± 0.08 kcal/kg/km). CONCLUSIONS: The properties of ischemic preconditioning thought to affect exercise performance at vigorous to severe exercise intensities, which generate more extensive physiological challenge, are ineffective at submaximal workloads and, therefore, do not change running economy.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Many of the potential performance-enhancing properties of ischemic preconditioning suggest that the oxygen cost for a given endurance exercise workload will be reduced, thereby improving the economy of locomotion. The aim of this study was to identify whether ischemic preconditioning improves exercise economy in recreational runners. METHODS: A randomized sham-controlled crossover study was employed in which 18 adults (age 27 ± 7 years; BMI 24.6 ± 3 kg/m2) completed two, incremental submaximal (65-85% VO2max) treadmill running protocols (3 × 5 min stages from 7.2-14.5 km/h) coupled with indirect calorimetry to assess running economy following ischemic preconditioning (3 × 5 min bilateral upper thigh ischemia) and sham control. Running economy was expressed as mlO2/kg/km and as the energy in kilocalories required to cover 1 km of horizontal distance (kcal/kg/km). RESULTS:Ischemic preconditioning did not influence steady-state heart rate, oxygen consumption, minute ventilation, respiratory exchange ratio, energy expenditure, and blood lactate. Likewise, running economy was similar (P = 0.647) between the sham (from 201.6 ± 17.7 to 204.0 ± 16.1 mlO2/kg/km) and ischemic preconditioning trials (from 202.8 ± 16.2 to 203.1 ± 15.6 mlO2/kg/km). There was no influence (P = 0.21) of ischemic preconditioning on running economy expressed as the caloric unit cost (from 0.96 ± 0.12 to 1.01 ± 0.11 kcal/kg/km) compared with sham (from 1.00 ± 0.10 to 1.00 ± 0.08 kcal/kg/km). CONCLUSIONS: The properties of ischemic preconditioning thought to affect exercise performance at vigorous to severe exercise intensities, which generate more extensive physiological challenge, are ineffective at submaximal workloads and, therefore, do not change running economy.
Authors: S Cocking; T Landman; M Benson; R Lord; H Jones; D Gaze; D H J Thijssen; K George Journal: Scand J Med Sci Sports Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 4.221
Authors: Joost P H Seeger; Silvie Timmers; Danique J M Ploegmakers; N Timothy Cable; Maria T E Hopman; Dick H J Thijssen Journal: J Sci Med Sport Date: 2016-05-16 Impact factor: 4.319
Authors: T C Barbosa; A C Machado; I D Braz; I A Fernandes; L C Vianna; A C L Nobrega; B M Silva Journal: Scand J Med Sci Sports Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 4.221
Authors: Patricia C E de Groot; Dick H J Thijssen; Manuel Sanchez; Reinier Ellenkamp; Maria T E Hopman Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2009-09-18 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Moacir Marocolo; Mario A Moura Simim; Anderson Bernardino; Iury Reis Monteiro; Stephen D Patterson; Gustavo R da Mota Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2019-08-26 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Afton D Seeley; Aaron R Caldwell; Lawrence P Cahalin; Soyeon Ahn; Arlette C Perry; Brian Arwari; Kevin A Jacobs Journal: Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 3.210