Search

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of progressive overload in resistance training on muscle strength and cross-sectional area (CSA) by specifically comparing the impact of increasing load (LOADprog) versus an increase in repetitions (REPSprog). We used a within-subject experimental design in which 39 previously untrained young persons (20 men and 19 women) had their legs randomized to LOADprog and REPSprog. Outcomes were assessed before and after 10 weeks of training. Muscle strength was assessed using the one repetition maximum (1RM) test on the leg extension exercise, and the CSA of the vastus lateralis was assessed by ultrasonography. Both protocols increased 1RM values from pre (LOADprog: 52.90±16.32 kg; REPSprog: 51.67±15.84 kg) to post (LOADprog: 69.05±18.55 kg, REPSprog: 66.82±17.95 kg), with no difference between them (P +>+0.05). Similarly, both protocols also increased in CSA values from pre (LOADprog: 21.34±4.71 cm²; REPSprog: 21.08±4.62 cm²) to post (LOADprog: 23.53±5.41 cm², REPSprog: 23.39±5.19 cm²), with no difference between them (P +>+0.05). In conclusion, our findings indicate that the progression of overload through load or repetitions can be used to promote gains in strength and muscle hypertrophy in young men and women in the early stages of training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Low-load resistance training (LL) and neuromuscular electrostimulation (NES), both combined with blood flow restriction (BFR), emerge as effective strategies to maintain or increase muscle mass. It is well established that LL-BFR promotes similar increases in muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and lower rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and pain compared with traditional resistance training protocols. On the other hand, only 2 studies with conflicting results have investigated the effects of NES-BFR on CSA, RPE, and pain. In addition, no study directly compared LL-BFR and NES-BFR. Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the effects of LL-BFR and NES-BFR on vastus lateralis CSA, RPE, and pain. Individual response for muscle hypertrophy was also compared between protocols. Design: Intrasubject longitudinal study. Setting: University research laboratory. Intervention: Fifteen healthy young males (age = 23 [5] y; weight = 77.6 [11.3] kg; height = 1.76 [0.08] m). Main outcome measures: Vastus lateralis CSA was measured through ultrasound at baseline (pre) and after 20 training sessions (post). The RPE and pain responses were obtained through modified 10-point scales, handled during all training sessions. Results: Both protocols demonstrated significant increases in muscle CSA (P < .0001). However, the LL-BFR demonstrated significantly greater CSA changes compared with NES-BFR (LL-BFR = 11.2%, NES-BFR = 4.6%; P < .0001). Comparing individual increases in CSA, 12 subjects (85.7% of the sample) presented greater muscle hypertrophy for LL-BFR than for the NES-BFR protocol. In addition, LL-BFR produced significantly lower RPE and pain responses (P < .0001). Conclusions: The LL-BFR produced significantly greater increases in CSA with significant less RPE and pain than NES-BFR. In addition, LL-BFR resulted in greater individual muscle hypertrophy responses for most subjects compared with NES-BFR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: DNA methylation regulates exercise-induced changes in the skeletal muscle transcriptome. However, the specificity and the time course responses in the myogenic regulatory factors DNA methylation and mRNA expression after divergent exercise modes are unknown. Purpose: This study aimed to compare the time course changes in DNA methylation and mRNA expression for selected myogenic regulatory factors (MYOD1 , MYF5 , and MYF6) immediately after, 4 h after, and 8 h after a single bout of resistance exercise (RE), high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE), and concurrent exercise (CE). Methods: Nine healthy but untrained males (age, 23.9 ± 2.8 yr; body mass, 70.1 ± 14.9 kg; peak oxygen uptake [V̇O2peak], 41.4 ± 5.2 mL·kg−1·min−1; mean ± SD) performed a counterbalanced, randomized order of RE (4 × 8–12 repetition maximum), HIIE (12 × 1 min sprints at V̇O2peak running velocity), and CE (RE followed by HIIE). Skeletal muscle biopsies (vastus lateralis) were taken before (REST) immediately (0 h), 4 h, and 8 h after each exercise bout. Results: Compared with REST, MYOD1 , MYF5 , and MYF6 , mean methylation across all CpGs analyzed was reduced after 4 and 8 h in response to all exercise protocols (P < 0.05). Reduced levels of MYOD1 methylation were observed after HIIE and CE compared with RE (P < 0.05). Compared with REST, all exercise bouts increased mRNA expression over time (MYOD1 at 4 and 8 h, and MYF6 at 4 h; P < 0.05). MYF5 mRNA expression was lower after 4 h compared with 0 h and higher at 8 h compared with 4 h (P < 0.05). Conclusions: We observed an interrelated but not time-aligned response between the exercise-induced changes in myogenic regulatory factors demethylation and mRNA expression after divergent exercise modes. Despite divergent contractile stimuli, changes in DNA methylation and mRNA expression in skeletal muscle were largely confined to the late (4–8 h) recovery period and similar between the different exercise challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Given the comparable muscle hypertrophy constantly observed between blood-flow restriction exercise (BFR-RE) and conventional resistance exercise, understanding their particular rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and pain may help to better prescribe exercise at a low-discomfort level, thus increasing its feasibility. Design: Randomized crossover study. Objective: To compare the RPE and pain response between conventional high- (HI-RE) and low-intensity resistance exercise (LI-RE) protocols to failure with a nonmuscular failure LI-RE associated with BFR-RE. Participants: A total of 12 men (age: 20 [3] y; body mass: 73.5 [9] kg; height: 174 [6] cm). Interventions: Four sets of 45° leg-press exercises in 3 different conditions: (1) BFR-RE (15 repetitions; 30% 1-repetition maximum), (2) HI-RE (80% 1-repetition maximum to muscular failure), and (3) LI-RE (30% 1-repetition maximum to muscular failure). Main Outcome Measures: RPE and pain were assessed immediately before exercise session and after the end of each of the 4 sets. Results: RPE and pain levels increased throughout the exercise sets for all RE protocols (all, Ps < .05). HI-RE and LI-RE protocols showed similar increase in RPE and pain levels during all exercise sets (P < .05); however, both protocols demonstrated higher RPE and pain response compared with BFR-RE after each of the 4 sets (all Ps < .05 between-group comparisons). Conclusions: Our results demonstrated that both HI-RE and LI-RE to muscular failure resulted in similar and significant increases in RPE and pain levels, regardless of exercise intensity. In addition, nonmuscular failure BFR-RE also increased RPE and pain response, however, to a lower extent compared with either HI-RE or LI-RE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bergamasco, JGA, Gomes da Silva, D, Bittencourt, DF, Martins de Oliveira, R, Júnior, JCB, Caruso, FC, Godoi, D, Borghi-Silva, A, and Libardi, CA. Low-load resistance training performed to muscle failure or near muscle failure does not promote additional gains on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and functional performance of older adults. J Strength Cond Res 36(5): 1209–1215, 2022—The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of low-load resistance training (RT) protocols performed to failure (FAI), to voluntary interruption (VOL), and with a fixed low repetitions (FIX) on muscle strength, hypertrophy, and functional performance in older adults. Forty-one subjects (60–77 years) were randomized into one of the RT protocols (FAI, VOL, or FIX) and completed 12 weeks of RT at 40% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM), twice a week. The assessments included 1RM test, muscle cross-sectional area (CSA), rate of torque development (RTD), and functional performance (chair stand [CS], habitual gait speed [HGS], maximal gait speed [MGS], and timed up-and-go [TUG]). All protocols significantly increased 1RM values from Pre (FAI: 318.3 ± 116.3 kg; VOL: 342.9 ± 93.7 kg; FIX: 328.0 ± 107.2 kg) to Post (FAI: 393.0 ± 143.1 kg, 23.5%; VOL: 423.0 ± 114.5 kg, 23.3%; FIX: 397.8 ± 94.6 kg, 21.3%; p < 0.0001 for all groups). Regarding CS, all protocols showed significant improvements from Pre (FAI: 11.5 ± 2.4 seconds; VOL: 12.1 ± 2.5 seconds; FIX: 11.3 ± 1.1 seconds) to Post (FAI: 10.5 ± 1.1 seconds, −8.5%, p = 0.001; VOL: 10.3 ± 1.5 seconds, −15.1%, p = 0.001; FIX: 11.0 ± 1.1, −3.2%, p = 0.001). Habitual gait speed values increased significantly from Pre (FAI: 1.3 ± 0.2 m·s−1; VOL: 1.3 ± 0.1 m·s−1; FIX: 1.3 ± 0.1 m·s−1) to Post (FAI: 1.4 ± 0.2 m·s−1, 2.5%, p = 0.03; VOL: 1.4 ± 0.2 m·s−1, 5.2%, p = 0.036; FIX: 1.4 ± 0.1 m·s−1, 5.7%, p = 0.03). No significant differences between protocols were found (p > 0.05). In addition, there were no significant changes in CSA, RTD, MGS, and TUG for any protocols (p > 0.05). In conclusion, low-load RT performed without muscle failure promotes significant improvements in muscle strength and some parameters of functional performance in older adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a within-subject design we compared the individual responses between drop-set (DS) vs. traditional resistance training (TRAD) (n=16) and crescent pyramid (CP) vs. TRAD (n=15). Muscle cross-sectional area (CSA), leg press and leg extension 1 repetition maximum (1-RM) were assessed pre and post training. At group level, CSA increased from pre to post (DS: 7.8% vs. TRAD: 7.5%, P =0.02; CP: 7.5% vs. TRAD: 7.8%, P =0.02). All protocols increased the 1-RM from pre to post for leg press (DS: 24.9% vs. TRAD: 26.8%, P < 0.0001; CP: 27.3% vs. TRAD:2 6.3%, P < 0.0001) and leg extension (DS: 17.1% vs. TRAD: 17.3%, P < 0.0001; CP: 17.0% vs. TRAD: 16.6%, P < 0.0001). Individual analysis for CSA demonstrated no differences between protocols in 15 subjects. For leg press 1-RM, 5 subjects responded more to TRAD, 2 to DS and 9 similarly between protocols. In TRAD vs. CP, 4 subjects responded more to CP, 1 to TRAD and 10 similarly between protocols. For leg extension 1-RM 2 subjects responded more to DS, 3 to TRAD and 11 similarly between protocols. Additionally, 2 subjects responded more to CP, 2 to TRAD and 11 similarly between protocols. In conclusion, all protocols induced similar individual responses for CSA. For 1-RM, some subjects experience greater gains for the protocol performed with higher loads, such as CP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose was to compare the effects of protein (whey protein) and carbohydrate supplementation and protein alone both combined with resistance training on muscle strength, muscle mass and total training volume progression in untrained young men. Resistance training was performed using the leg press and knee extension until concentric failure (8−12 repetition maximum), three times a week for eight weeks. Muscle strength and muscle cross-sectional area were assessed before and after training. Total training volume progression was calculated considering the first and eighth week. Seventeen men completed the study (protein and carbohydrate, n=9, age 23.44 ± 4.56 years, weight: 62.13±6.17 kg, height: 1.75±0.02 m, body mass index: 20.29±2.08 kg/m2 ; protein, n=8, age 24.63±2.39 years, weight: 69.01±5.57 kg, height: 1.77±0.07 m; body mass index: 21.64±1.05 kg/m2. Both protocols showed similar increases in muscle strength (effect size: protein and carbohydrate=1.28; protein=0.97; p<0.001), muscle cross sectional area (effect size: protein and carbohydrate=0.66; protein=0.47; p<0.001) and total training volume progression (effect size: protein and carbohydrate=2.68; protein=1.63; p<0.001) after training. No differences were found between groups p>0.05). Protein and carbohydrate supplementation combined with resistance training does not induce greater gains in muscle strength, hypertrophy and total training volume compared to resistance training combined with protein alone in untrained individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to compare if an acute exercise session of high-load resistance training (HL-RT, e.g. 70% of 1 repetition-maximum, 1 RM) induces a higher magnitude of muscle damage compared with a RT protocol with low-loads (e.g. 20% 1 RM) associated with partial blood flow restriction (LL-BFR), and investigate the recovery in the days after the protocols. We used an unilateral crossover research design in which 10 young women (22(2) y; 162(5) cm; 66(11) kg) performed HL-RT and LL-BFR in a randomized, counterbalanced manner with a minimum interval of 2 weeks between protocols. Indirect muscle damage markers were evaluated before and once a day for 4 days into recovery. Main results showed decreases of 8–12% at 24–48 h in maximal voluntary isometric and concentric contraction torques (P < 0.03), and changes in muscle architecture markers (P < 0.03) for HL-RT and LL-BFR, with no differences between protocols (P > 0.05). Moreover, delayed onset muscle soreness increased only after LL-BFR (P < 0.001). We conclude that an acute bout of low volume HL-RT or LL-BFR to failure resulted in edema-induced muscle swelling, but do not induce major or long-lasting decrements in muscle function and the level of soreness promoted from LL-BFR was mild. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]