Goncalo V Mendonca1,2, Carolina Vila-Chã3,4, Carolina Teodósio5, André D Goncalves5, Sandro R Freitas5,6, Pedro Mil-Homens5,6, Pedro Pezarat-Correia5,6. 1. Neuromuscular Research Lab, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, Cruz Quebrada, Dafundo, 1499-002, Lisbon, Portugal. gvmendonca@gmail.com. 2. CIPER, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, Cruz Quebrada, 1499-002, Dafundo, Portugal. gvmendonca@gmail.com. 3. Polytechnic Institute of Guarda, Av. Dr. Francisco Sá Carneiro, n. 50, 6300-559, Guarda, Portugal. 4. Research Center in Sports Sciences, Health and Human Development (CIDESD), Vila-Real, Portugal. 5. Neuromuscular Research Lab, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, Cruz Quebrada, Dafundo, 1499-002, Lisbon, Portugal. 6. CIPER, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Estrada da Costa, Cruz Quebrada, 1499-002, Dafundo, Portugal.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Determine whether unilateral low-intensity blood-flow restricted (LIBFR) exercise is as effective as high-intensity (HI) resistance training for improving contralateral muscle strength. METHODS: Thirty healthy adults (20-30 years) were randomly allocated to the following dynamic plantar-flexion training interventions: HI [75% of one-repetition maximum (1RM), 4 sets, 10 reps] and LIBFR [20% of 1RM, 4 sets, 30 + 15 + 15 + 15 reps]. Evoked V-wave and H-reflex recruitment curves, as well as maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) and panoramic ultrasound assessments of the trained and untrained soleus muscles were obtained pre-training, post-4 weeks of training and post-4 weeks of detraining. RESULTS: Both interventions failed to increase contralateral MVC and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA). Yet, contralateral rate of torque development (RTD) was enhanced by both regimens (12-26%) and this was accompanied by heightened soleus EMG within the first milliseconds of the rising torque-time curve (14-22%; p < 0.05). These improvements were dissipated after detraining. Contralateral adaptations were not accompanied by changes in V-wave or H-reflex excitability. Conversely, LIBFR and HI elicited a similar magnitude of ipsilateral increase in MVC, RTD and CSA post-training (10-18%). Improvements in V-wave amplitude and soleus EMG were limited to the trained leg assigned to LIBFR training (p < 0.05). While gains in strength and CSA remained preserved post-4 weeks of detraining, this did not occur with RTD. CONCLUSION: Since gains in RTD were similar between interventions, our findings indicate that both training regimens can be used interchangeably for improving contralateral rapid torque production. Ultimately, this may be beneficial in circumstances of limb immobilization after injury or surgery.
PURPOSE: Determine whether unilateral low-intensity blood-flow restricted (LIBFR) exercise is as effective as high-intensity (HI) resistance training for improving contralateral muscle strength. METHODS: Thirty healthy adults (20-30 years) were randomly allocated to the following dynamic plantar-flexion training interventions: HI [75% of one-repetition maximum (1RM), 4 sets, 10 reps] and LIBFR [20% of 1RM, 4 sets, 30 + 15 + 15 + 15 reps]. Evoked V-wave and H-reflex recruitment curves, as well as maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) and panoramic ultrasound assessments of the trained and untrained soleus muscles were obtained pre-training, post-4 weeks of training and post-4 weeks of detraining. RESULTS: Both interventions failed to increase contralateral MVC and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA). Yet, contralateral rate of torque development (RTD) was enhanced by both regimens (12-26%) and this was accompanied by heightened soleus EMG within the first milliseconds of the rising torque-time curve (14-22%; p < 0.05). These improvements were dissipated after detraining. Contralateral adaptations were not accompanied by changes in V-wave or H-reflex excitability. Conversely, LIBFR and HI elicited a similar magnitude of ipsilateral increase in MVC, RTD and CSA post-training (10-18%). Improvements in V-wave amplitude and soleus EMG were limited to the trained leg assigned to LIBFR training (p < 0.05). While gains in strength and CSA remained preserved post-4 weeks of detraining, this did not occur with RTD. CONCLUSION: Since gains in RTD were similar between interventions, our findings indicate that both training regimens can be used interchangeably for improving contralateral rapid torque production. Ultimately, this may be beneficial in circumstances of limb immobilization after injury or surgery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cross-education; H reflex; Neural; Strength; V wave
Authors: Paul Ansdell; Callum G Brownstein; Jakob Škarabot; Kirsty M Hicks; Davina C M Simoes; Kevin Thomas; Glyn Howatson; Sandra K Hunter; Stuart Goodall Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2019-03-07
Authors: Afonso Borges; Carolina Teodósio; Pedro Matos; Pedro Mil-Homens; Pedro Pezarat-Correia; Christopher Fahs; Goncalo V Mendonca Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Brian E Barnett; Scott J Dankel; Brittany R Counts; Allison L Nooe; Takashi Abe; Jeremy P Loenneke Journal: Clin Physiol Funct Imaging Date: 2015-07-03 Impact factor: 2.273
Authors: Ethan C Hill; Paola M Rivera; Chris E Proppe; David H Gonzalez Rojas; Aaron M Wizenberg; Joshua L Keller Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2022-06-15 Impact factor: 2.974