Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Cardiovascular Responses to a Full Resistance Training Session Performed with and Without Blood Flow Restriction
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Cardiovascular Responses to a Full Resistance Training Session Performed with and Without Blood Flow Restriction
Do you wish to request the book?
Cardiovascular Responses to a Full Resistance Training Session Performed with and Without Blood Flow Restriction
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Cardiovascular Responses to a Full Resistance Training Session Performed with and Without Blood Flow Restriction
2025
Overview
Resistance training (RT) can induce cardiovascular overload, especially at high intensities. Blood flow restriction (BFR) has emerged as a low-load alternative that is potentially effective and safe, although its hemodynamic and respiratory effects remain controversial.
The aim of this study was to compare cardiovascular responses between a high-load RT session (RT_HL; 70% of one repetition maximum-1RM) and a low-load session combined with BFR (RT_LL+BFR; 30% 1RM).
Nineteen trained men (24.3 ± 3.9 years; 177.7 ± 6.3 cm; 84.7 ± 13.0 kg) performed the RT_HL and RT_LL+BFR protocols, with eight exercises for each protocol. The following variables-heart rate (HR), percentage of maximum heart rate (%HRmax), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and rate pressure product (RPP)-were assessed during the protocols.
Both protocols significantly increased HR (pre: 74 ± 8 bpm; post: RT_HL = 142 ± 9 bpm; RT_LL+BFR = 133 ± 6 bpm;
< 0.01), %HRmax (RT_HL = 72 ± 5%; RT_LL+BFR = 69 ± 4%;
< 0.01), SBP (RT_HL = 144 ± 6 mmHg; RT_LL+BFR = 140 ± 6 mmHg;
< 0.05), and RPP (RT_HL = 20,469 ± 1620; RT_LL+BFR = 18,637 ± 1253;
< 0.01) compared to resting values. No variable exceeded safety thresholds for RPP (<30,000; %HRmax < 75%), and DPB showed a slight elevation in both conditions (
< 0.05), but without differences between protocols (
= 0.28).
Exercise load intensity was an important determinant of hemodynamic responses, but BFR elicited comparable stimuli with low load, thereby emphasizing improved safety to traditional high-load-intensity training.
Publisher
MDPI AG
Subject
/ Ischemia
