蛋白质补充优化肌肉力量和肥厚反应诱导低负荷训练与血流限制阻力训练的个体。

IF 2.9 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS

Clinical nutrition ESPEN Pub Date : 2025-03-17 DOI:10.1016/j.clnesp.2025.03.018

Levi da Silva Vendruscolo , Helderson Brendon , Victoria Hévia Larrain , André Yui Aihara , Vitor de Salles Painelli

{"title":"蛋白质补充优化肌肉力量和肥厚反应诱导低负荷训练与血流限制阻力训练的个体。","authors":"Levi da Silva Vendruscolo , Helderson Brendon , Victoria Hévia Larrain , André Yui Aihara , Vitor de Salles Painelli","doi":"10.1016/j.clnesp.2025.03.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background & aims</h3><div>Low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training induces favorable changes in muscle hypertrophy and strength. However, the potential additive effect of LL-BFR and protein supplementation on these outcomes remains unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Twenty-four recreationally resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to either a protein (PRO) or placebo (PLA) supplementation group in a 2:1 ratio. After being submitted to maximum dynamic strength (1-RM) and elbow flexors muscles cross-sectional area (EFCSA) assessments at baseline, participants were enrolled in a 3-week unilateral LL-BFR training (4 days per week, 4 sets of 15 repetitions, 30 % 1-RM) for the elbow flexors muscles in the incline dumbbell curl exercise. Psychological outcomes (rate of perceived exertion, pain and muscle soreness) were obtained at the first and last training session. EFCSA and 1-RM were reassessed after LL-BFR, with EFCSA being assessed at 45 %, 65 % and 85 % of humerus length.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Psychological responses to LL-BFR improved in PRO and PLA (both <em>p</em> < 0.05), with no significant between-group differences (all comparisons, <em>p</em> > 0.05). A significant improvement in 1-RM was detected for PRO (+7.2 %, <em>p</em> = 0.0002), but not PLA (+3.5 %, <em>p</em> = 0.156). PRO experienced significant increases in EFCSA at 45 % (+7.5 %, <em>p</em> = 0.021), 65 % (+5.2 %, <em>p</em> = 0.033) and 85 % lengths (+8.4 %, <em>p</em> = 0.002), while PLA experienced increases only at the 85 % length (+5.9 %, <em>p</em> = 0.045). Absolute increases in 1-RM were greater for PRO vs. PLA (<em>p</em> = 0.039), whereas increases in EFCSA tended to be greater for PRO vs. PLA at 45 % (<em>p</em> = 0.086) and 65 % lengths (<em>p</em> = 0.072).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our results showed that protein supplementation optimized the LL-BFR-induced muscle strength and hypertrophy improvements in trained individuals under comparable psychological responses.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10352,"journal":{"name":"Clinical nutrition ESPEN","volume":"67 ","pages":"Pages 206-216"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protein supplementation optimizes muscle strength and hypertrophic responses induced by low-load training with blood flow restriction in resistance-trained individuals\",\"authors\":\"Levi da Silva Vendruscolo , Helderson Brendon , Victoria Hévia Larrain , André Yui Aihara , Vitor de Salles Painelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clnesp.2025.03.018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background & aims</h3><div>Low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training induces favorable changes in muscle hypertrophy and strength. However, the potential additive effect of LL-BFR and protein supplementation on these outcomes remains unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Twenty-four recreationally resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to either a protein (PRO) or placebo (PLA) supplementation group in a 2:1 ratio. After being submitted to maximum dynamic strength (1-RM) and elbow flexors muscles cross-sectional area (EFCSA) assessments at baseline, participants were enrolled in a 3-week unilateral LL-BFR training (4 days per week, 4 sets of 15 repetitions, 30 % 1-RM) for the elbow flexors muscles in the incline dumbbell curl exercise. Psychological outcomes (rate of perceived exertion, pain and muscle soreness) were obtained at the first and last training session. EFCSA and 1-RM were reassessed after LL-BFR, with EFCSA being assessed at 45 %, 65 % and 85 % of humerus length.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Psychological responses to LL-BFR improved in PRO and PLA (both <em>p</em> < 0.05), with no significant between-group differences (all comparisons, <em>p</em> > 0.05). A significant improvement in 1-RM was detected for PRO (+7.2 %, <em>p</em> = 0.0002), but not PLA (+3.5 %, <em>p</em> = 0.156). PRO experienced significant increases in EFCSA at 45 % (+7.5 %, <em>p</em> = 0.021), 65 % (+5.2 %, <em>p</em> = 0.033) and 85 % lengths (+8.4 %, <em>p</em> = 0.002), while PLA experienced increases only at the 85 % length (+5.9 %, <em>p</em> = 0.045). Absolute increases in 1-RM were greater for PRO vs. PLA (<em>p</em> = 0.039), whereas increases in EFCSA tended to be greater for PRO vs. PLA at 45 % (<em>p</em> = 0.086) and 65 % lengths (<em>p</em> = 0.072).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our results showed that protein supplementation optimized the LL-BFR-induced muscle strength and hypertrophy improvements in trained individuals under comparable psychological responses.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10352,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical nutrition ESPEN\",\"volume\":\"67 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 206-216\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical nutrition ESPEN\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405457725001093\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical nutrition ESPEN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405457725001093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的：低负荷血流量限制（LL-BFR）训练诱导肌肉肥大和力量的有利变化。然而，LL-BFR和蛋白质补充对这些结果的潜在叠加效应尚不清楚。方法：24名娱乐性抵抗训练的男性按2:1的比例随机分配到蛋白质（PRO）或安慰剂（PLA）补充组。在基线进行最大动态力量（1-RM）和肘关节屈肌横截面积（EFCSA）评估后，参与者参加了为期3周的单侧l - bfr训练（每周4天，4组15次重复，30% 1-RM），用于倾斜哑铃弯曲练习中的肘关节屈肌。在第一次和最后一次训练中获得心理结果（感知劳累率、疼痛和肌肉酸痛）。在LL-BFR后重新评估EFCSA和1-RM， EFCSA分别在肱骨长度的45%、65%和85%处进行评估。结果：PRO和PLA对LL-BFR的心理反应均有改善（p0.05）。PRO的1-RM显著改善（+7.2%,p=0.0002），但PLA没有显著改善（+3.5%,p=0.156）。PRO在45% （+7.5%,p=0.021）、65% （+5.2%,p=0.033）和85%长度（+8.4%,p=0.002）时EFCSA显著增加，而PLA仅在85%长度时增加（+5.9%,p=0.045）。PRO比PLA的1-RM绝对增加更大（p=0.039），而EFCSA的增加在45% （p=0.086）和65% （p=0.072）时PRO比PLA更大。结论：我们的研究结果表明，在相同的心理反应下，蛋白质补充优化了ll - bfr诱导的肌肉力量和肥厚的改善。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Protein supplementation optimizes muscle strength and hypertrophic responses induced by low-load training with blood flow restriction in resistance-trained individuals

Background & aims

Low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFR) training induces favorable changes in muscle hypertrophy and strength. However, the potential additive effect of LL-BFR and protein supplementation on these outcomes remains unclear.

Methods

Twenty-four recreationally resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to either a protein (PRO) or placebo (PLA) supplementation group in a 2:1 ratio. After being submitted to maximum dynamic strength (1-RM) and elbow flexors muscles cross-sectional area (EFCSA) assessments at baseline, participants were enrolled in a 3-week unilateral LL-BFR training (4 days per week, 4 sets of 15 repetitions, 30 % 1-RM) for the elbow flexors muscles in the incline dumbbell curl exercise. Psychological outcomes (rate of perceived exertion, pain and muscle soreness) were obtained at the first and last training session. EFCSA and 1-RM were reassessed after LL-BFR, with EFCSA being assessed at 45 %, 65 % and 85 % of humerus length.

Results

Psychological responses to LL-BFR improved in PRO and PLA (both p < 0.05), with no significant between-group differences (all comparisons, p > 0.05). A significant improvement in 1-RM was detected for PRO (+7.2 %, p = 0.0002), but not PLA (+3.5 %, p = 0.156). PRO experienced significant increases in EFCSA at 45 % (+7.5 %, p = 0.021), 65 % (+5.2 %, p = 0.033) and 85 % lengths (+8.4 %, p = 0.002), while PLA experienced increases only at the 85 % length (+5.9 %, p = 0.045). Absolute increases in 1-RM were greater for PRO vs. PLA (p = 0.039), whereas increases in EFCSA tended to be greater for PRO vs. PLA at 45 % (p = 0.086) and 65 % lengths (p = 0.072).

Conclusion

Our results showed that protein supplementation optimized the LL-BFR-induced muscle strength and hypertrophy improvements in trained individuals under comparable psychological responses.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Clinical nutrition ESPEN NUTRITION & DIETETICS-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

3.30%

发文量

512

期刊介绍： Clinical Nutrition ESPEN is an electronic-only journal and is an official publication of the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN). Nutrition and nutritional care have gained wide clinical and scientific interest during the past decades. The increasing knowledge of metabolic disturbances and nutritional assessment in chronic and acute diseases has stimulated rapid advances in design, development and clinical application of nutritional support. The aims of ESPEN are to encourage the rapid diffusion of knowledge and its application in the field of clinical nutrition and metabolism. Published bimonthly, Clinical Nutrition ESPEN focuses on publishing articles on the relationship between nutrition and disease in the setting of basic science and clinical practice. Clinical Nutrition ESPEN is available to all members of ESPEN and to all subscribers of Clinical Nutrition.