中等强度的持续训练会促进肌肉肥大吗?随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Julio Benvenutti Bueno de Camargo, Deivid G Silva, João G A Bergamasco, Diego Bittencourt, Enya T A Nacafucasaco, Nathalia F Dias, Ana J F Neves, Maíra C Scarpelli, Cleiton A Libardi
{"title":"中等强度的持续训练会促进肌肉肥大吗?随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Julio Benvenutti Bueno de Camargo, Deivid G Silva, João G A Bergamasco, Diego Bittencourt, Enya T A Nacafucasaco, Nathalia F Dias, Ana J F Neves, Maíra C Scarpelli, Cleiton A Libardi","doi":"10.1139/apnm-2025-0152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The effects of moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on muscle hypertrophy remain controversial, largely due to the absence of non-exercise control groups in several trials and considerable heterogeneity in training protocols, assessment methods, and participant characteristics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effects of MICT on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Following PRISMA guidelines, searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for chronic human interventions comparing MICT to non-exercise controls, reporting both whole-body and localized muscle mass outcomes (lower limb lean mass, muscle cross-sectional area, fiber cross-sectional area, and muscle thickness) in healthy adults without chronic diseases or musculoskeletal injuries. A random-effects model compared MICT vs. control for total and regional muscle mass outcomes combined and separately. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The standardized mean difference was 0.050 (95% CI: -0.147 to 0.248) for total and regional outcomes combined, and 0.080 (95% CI: -0.277 to 0.437) for regional outcomes alone. In conclusion, the current evidence does not consistently support a hypertrophic effect of MICT. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution due to variability in study design, populations, and measurement sensitivity.</p>","PeriodicalId":93878,"journal":{"name":"Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism = Physiologie appliquee, nutrition et metabolisme","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does moderate intensity continuous training promote muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Julio Benvenutti Bueno de Camargo, Deivid G Silva, João G A Bergamasco, Diego Bittencourt, Enya T A Nacafucasaco, Nathalia F Dias, Ana J F Neves, Maíra C Scarpelli, Cleiton A Libardi\",\"doi\":\"10.1139/apnm-2025-0152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The effects of moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on muscle hypertrophy remain controversial, largely due to the absence of non-exercise control groups in several trials and considerable heterogeneity in training protocols, assessment methods, and participant characteristics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effects of MICT on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Following PRISMA guidelines, searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for chronic human interventions comparing MICT to non-exercise controls, reporting both whole-body and localized muscle mass outcomes (lower limb lean mass, muscle cross-sectional area, fiber cross-sectional area, and muscle thickness) in healthy adults without chronic diseases or musculoskeletal injuries. A random-effects model compared MICT vs. control for total and regional muscle mass outcomes combined and separately. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The standardized mean difference was 0.050 (95% CI: -0.147 to 0.248) for total and regional outcomes combined, and 0.080 (95% CI: -0.277 to 0.437) for regional outcomes alone. In conclusion, the current evidence does not consistently support a hypertrophic effect of MICT. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution due to variability in study design, populations, and measurement sensitivity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93878,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism = Physiologie appliquee, nutrition et metabolisme\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism = Physiologie appliquee, nutrition et metabolisme\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2025-0152\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied physiology, nutrition, and metabolism = Physiologie appliquee, nutrition et metabolisme","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2025-0152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

中等强度连续训练(MICT)对肌肉肥大的影响仍然存在争议,这主要是由于在一些试验中缺乏非运动对照组,并且在训练方案、评估方法和参与者特征方面存在相当大的异质性。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在研究MICT对骨骼肌肥大的影响。遵循PRISMA指南,在MEDLINE、Embase、Web of Science、Scopus和Cochrane Library中进行了慢性人体干预的搜索,将MICT与非运动对照进行比较,报告了没有慢性疾病或肌肉骨骼损伤的健康成人的全身和局部肌肉质量结果(下肢瘦质量、肌肉横截面积、纤维横截面积和肌肉厚度)。一个随机效应模型比较了MICT与对照组的总肌肉质量和局部肌肉质量结果。13项研究符合纳入标准。总结局和地区结局的标准化平均差异为0.050 (95% CI: -0.147至0.248),单独地区结局的标准化平均差异为0.080 (95% CI: -0.277至0.437)。总之,目前的证据并不一致地支持MICT的肥厚效应。然而,由于研究设计、人群和测量敏感性的差异,这一结论应谨慎解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does moderate intensity continuous training promote muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

The effects of moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on muscle hypertrophy remain controversial, largely due to the absence of non-exercise control groups in several trials and considerable heterogeneity in training protocols, assessment methods, and participant characteristics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effects of MICT on skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Following PRISMA guidelines, searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for chronic human interventions comparing MICT to non-exercise controls, reporting both whole-body and localized muscle mass outcomes (lower limb lean mass, muscle cross-sectional area, fiber cross-sectional area, and muscle thickness) in healthy adults without chronic diseases or musculoskeletal injuries. A random-effects model compared MICT vs. control for total and regional muscle mass outcomes combined and separately. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The standardized mean difference was 0.050 (95% CI: -0.147 to 0.248) for total and regional outcomes combined, and 0.080 (95% CI: -0.277 to 0.437) for regional outcomes alone. In conclusion, the current evidence does not consistently support a hypertrophic effect of MICT. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution due to variability in study design, populations, and measurement sensitivity.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信