Effect of blood-flow restricted vs heavy-load strength training on muscle strength: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Heavy-load strength training (HLT) is generally considered the Gold Standard exercise modality for inducing gains in skeletal muscle strength. However, use of heavy external exercise loads may be contraindicative in frail individuals. Low-load resistance exercise combined with partial blood-flow restriction (LL-BFR exercise) may offer an effective alternative for increasing mechanical muscle strength and size. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of LL-BFR training to HLT on maximal muscle strength gains. Prospero registration-id (CRD42014013382). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search in six healthcare science databases and reference lists was conducted. Data selected for primary analysis consisted of post-intervention changes in maximal muscle strength. A random-effects meta-analysis with standardized mean differences (SMD) was used. RESULTS: Of 1413 papers identified through systematic search routines, sixteen papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria, totalling 153 participants completing HLT and 157 completing LL-BFR training. The magnitude of training-induced gains in maximal muscle strength did not differ between LL-BFR training and HLT (SMD of -0.17 (95% CI: -0.40; 0.05)). Low between-study heterogeneity was noted (I2  = 0.0%, Chi2 P = 9.65). CONCLUSION: Low-load blood-flow-restricted training appears equally effective of producing gains in maximal voluntary muscle strength compared to HLT in 20- to 80-year-old healthy and habitually active adults.

Influence of between-limb asymmetry in muscle mass, strength, and power on functional capacity in healthy older adults.

PURPOSE: Numerous daily tasks such as walking and rising from a chair involve bilateral lower limb movements. During such tasks, lower extremity function (LEF) may be compromised among older adults. LEF may be further impaired due to high degrees of between-limb asymmetry. The present study investigated the prevalence of between-limb asymmetry in muscle mass, strength, and power in a cohort of healthy older adults and examined the influence of between-limb asymmetry on LEF. METHODS: Two hundred and eight healthy older adults (mean age 70.2 ± 3.9 years) were tested for LEF (400 m walking and 30-seconds chair stand). Furthermore, maximal isometric and dynamic knee extensor strength, leg extensor power, and lower limb lean tissue mass (LTM) were obtained unilaterally. RESULTS: Mean between-limb asymmetry in maximal muscle strength and power ranged between 10% and 13%, whereas LTM asymmetry was 3 ± 2.3%. Asymmetry in dynamic knee extensor strength was larger for women compared with men (15.0 ± 11.8% vs 11.1 ± 9.5%; P = .005) Leg strength and power were positively correlated with LEF (r2  = .43-.46, P < .001). The weakest leg was not a stronger predictor of LEF than the strongest leg. Between-limb asymmetry in LTM and isometric strength was negatively associated with LEF (LTM; r2  = .12, P = .005, isometric peak torque; r2  = 0.40, P = .03.) but dynamic strength and power were not. CONCLUSION: The present study supports the notion that in order to improve or maintain LEF, healthy older adults should participate in training interventions that increase muscle strength and power, whereas the effects of reducing between-limb asymmetry in these parameters might be of less importance.