Jonathan Craven1, Ben Desbrow2, Surendran Sabapathy2, Phillip Bellinger2,3,4, Danielle McCartney5, Christopher Irwin2. 1. School of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University, Southport, 4222, Queensland, Australia. j.craven@griffith.edu.au. 2. School of Allied Health Sciences, Griffith University, Southport, 4222, Queensland, Australia. 3. Queensland Academy of Sport, Nathan, Queensland, Australia. 4. Griffith Sports Physiology and Performance, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. 5. School of Psychology, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rapid restoration of muscle glycogen stores is imperative for athletes undertaking consecutive strenuous exercise sessions with limited recovery time (e.g. ≤ 8 h). Strategies to optimise muscle glycogen re-synthesis in this situation are essential. This two-part systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effect of consuming carbohydrate (CHO) with and without protein (PRO) on the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis during short-term post-exercise recovery (≤ 8 h). METHODS: Studies were identified via the online databases Web of Science and Scopus. Investigations that measured muscle glycogen via needle biopsy during recovery (with the first measurement taken ≤ 30 min post-exercise and at least one additional measure taken ≤ 8 h post-exercise) following a standardised exercise bout (any type) under the following control vs. intervention conditions were included in the meta-analysis: part 1, water (or non-nutrient beverage) vs. CHO, and part 2, CHO vs. CHO+PRO. Publications were examined for methodological quality using the Rosendal scale. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses were conducted to evaluate intervention efficacy. RESULTS: Overall, 29 trials (n = 246 participants) derived from 21 publications were included in this review. The quality assessment yielded a Rosendal score of 61 ± 8% (mean ± standard deviation). Part 1: 10 trials (n = 86) were reviewed. Ingesting CHO during recovery (1.02 ± 0.4 g·kg body mass (BM)-1 h-1) improved the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis compared with water; change in muscle glycogen (MGΔ) re-synthesis rate = 23.5 mmol·kg dm-1 h-1, 95% CI 19.0-27.9, p < 0.001; I2 = 66.8%. A significant positive correlation (R2 = 0.44, p = 0.027) was observed between interval of CHO administration (≤ hourly vs. > hourly) and the mean difference in rate of re-synthesis between treatments. Part 2: 19 trials (n = 160) were reviewed. Ingesting CHO+PRO (CHO: 0.86 ± 0.2 g·kg BM-1 h-1; PRO: 0.27 ± 0.1 g·kg BM-1 h-1) did not improve the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis compared to CHO alone (0.95 ± 0.3 g·kg BM-1 h-1); MGΔ re-synthesis rate = 0.4 mmol·kg dm-1 h-1, 95% CI -2.7 to 3.4, p = 0.805; I2 = 56.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Athletes with limited time for recovery between consecutive exercise sessions should prioritise regular intake of CHO, while co-ingesting PRO with CHO appears unlikely to enhance (or impede) the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (identification code CRD42020156841 ).
BACKGROUND: Rapid restoration of muscle glycogen stores is imperative for athletes undertaking consecutive strenuous exercise sessions with limited recovery time (e.g. ≤ 8 h). Strategies to optimise muscle glycogen re-synthesis in this situation are essential. This two-part systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effect of consuming carbohydrate (CHO) with and without protein (PRO) on the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis during short-term post-exercise recovery (≤ 8 h). METHODS: Studies were identified via the online databases Web of Science and Scopus. Investigations that measured muscle glycogen via needle biopsy during recovery (with the first measurement taken ≤ 30 min post-exercise and at least one additional measure taken ≤ 8 h post-exercise) following a standardised exercise bout (any type) under the following control vs. intervention conditions were included in the meta-analysis: part 1, water (or non-nutrient beverage) vs. CHO, and part 2, CHO vs. CHO+PRO. Publications were examined for methodological quality using the Rosendal scale. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses were conducted to evaluate intervention efficacy. RESULTS: Overall, 29 trials (n = 246 participants) derived from 21 publications were included in this review. The quality assessment yielded a Rosendal score of 61 ± 8% (mean ± standard deviation). Part 1: 10 trials (n = 86) were reviewed. Ingesting CHO during recovery (1.02 ± 0.4 g·kg body mass (BM)-1 h-1) improved the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis compared with water; change in muscle glycogen (MGΔ) re-synthesis rate = 23.5 mmol·kg dm-1 h-1, 95% CI 19.0-27.9, p < 0.001; I2 = 66.8%. A significant positive correlation (R2 = 0.44, p = 0.027) was observed between interval of CHO administration (≤ hourly vs. > hourly) and the mean difference in rate of re-synthesis between treatments. Part 2: 19 trials (n = 160) were reviewed. Ingesting CHO+PRO (CHO: 0.86 ± 0.2 g·kg BM-1 h-1; PRO: 0.27 ± 0.1 g·kg BM-1 h-1) did not improve the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis compared to CHO alone (0.95 ± 0.3 g·kg BM-1 h-1); MGΔ re-synthesis rate = 0.4 mmol·kg dm-1 h-1, 95% CI -2.7 to 3.4, p = 0.805; I2 = 56.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Athletes with limited time for recovery between consecutive exercise sessions should prioritise regular intake of CHO, while co-ingesting PRO with CHO appears unlikely to enhance (or impede) the rate of muscle glycogen re-synthesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (identification code CRD42020156841 ).
Authors: Abdullah F Alghannam; Dawid Jedrzejewski; James Bilzon; Dylan Thompson; Kostas Tsintzas; James A Betts Journal: Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: David J Pedersen; Sarah J Lessard; Vernon G Coffey; Emmanuel G Churchley; Andrew M Wootton; They Ng; Matthew J Watt; John A Hawley Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2008-05-08