Effectiveness of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction vs. conventional high-intensity resistance training in older people diagnosed with sarcopenia: a randomized controlled trial. Zhang M, et al, Sci Rep 2024.
Adopter cette revue :
Si vous souhaitez prendre en charge cette revue d'article, merci de remplacer le tag Non_attribué par Attribué et ajoutez aussi votre nom d'utilisateur à l'emplacement prévu.
Réaliser des modifications :
Pour modifier ce document, il est nécessaire d'être connecté au site. Pour cela, assurez-vous d'avoir des identifiants valides. Si vous n'en avez pas, contactez-nous. Pour vous connecter, cliquez sur l'icône dans la barre de navigation.
Demander la finalisation de la revue de l'article :
Une fois revue et complétée, merci de remplacer l'étiquette Non_finalisé par A_finaliser. Un administrateur se chargera de valider la revue et de la publier avec le tag Finalisé.
Résumé et points clés
Low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (LRT-BFR) has shown potential to improve muscle strength and mass in different populations; however, there remains limited evidence in sarcopenic people diagnosed with sarcopenia criteria. This study systematically compared the effectiveness of LRT-BFR and conventional high-intensity resistance training (CRT) on clinical muscle outcomes (muscle mass, strength and performance), cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors and sarcopenia-related biomarkers of older people with sarcopenia. Twenty-one older individuals (aged 65 years and older) diagnosed with sarcopenia were randomly assigned to the LRT-BFR (20%-30% one-repetition maximum (1RM), n = 10) or CRT (60%-70% 1RM, n = 11) group. Both groups underwent a supervised exercise program three times a week for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was knee extensor strength (KES), and the secondary outcomes included body composition (body mass, body mass index and body fat percentage), muscle mass [appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI)], handgrip strength, physical performance [short physical performance battery (SPPB) and 6-m walk], CVD risk factors [hemodynamic parameters (systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate (SBP, DBP and HR)) and lipid parameters (total cholesterol, triglyceride (TG), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and low-density lipoprotein)], sarcopenia-related blood biomarkers [inflammatory biomarkers, hormones (growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor 1) and growth factors (myostatin and follistatin)] and quality of life [Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36)]. Both interventions remarkably improved the body composition, KES, 6-m walk, SBP, HDL, TG, GH, FST and SF-36 scores. CRT significantly improved the ASMI (p < 0.05) and SPPB (p < 0.05). A significant improvement in HR was observed only after LRT-BFR. No significant between-group differences were found before and after the interventions. This study suggested that LRT-BFR and CRT are beneficial to the clinical muscle outcomes, CVD risk factors and certain sarcopenia-related biomarkers of older people with sarcopenia. By comparison, CRT seems more effective in improving muscle mass, while LRT-BFR may be more beneficial for improving cardiovascular health in this population. Therefore, LRT-BFR is a potential alternative to CRT for aging sarcopenia.
Références de l'article
Effectiveness of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction vs. conventional high-intensity resistance training in older people diagnosed with sarcopenia: a randomized controlled trial.
Effectiveness of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction vs. conventional high-intensity resistance training in older people diagnosed with sarcopenia: a randomized controlled trial.
Zhang M, Song Y, Zhu J, Ding P, Chen N
Scientific reports
2024
Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 18;14(1):28427. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-79506-9.
Humans, *Sarcopenia/blood/therapy/physiopathology, Aged, *Resistance Training/methods, Male, Female, *Muscle Strength/physiology, Body Composition, Muscle, Skeletal/physiopathology, Blood Flow Restriction Therapy, Aged, 80 and over, Treatment Outcome, Hand Strength, Biomarkers/blood
Cette section peut être éditée par les relecteurs, les rédacteurs, les modérateurs et les administrateurs. Elle regroupe l'ensemble des échanges autours de la référence ci-dessus présentée.
Référez-vous à cette page pour connaître le rôle des utilisateurs et pour participer à la discussion.
Il n'y a, pour l'instant, aucune discussion en cours.