Relationship between limb and trunk muscle hypertrophy following high-intensity resistance training and blood flow–restricted low-intensity resistance training
Article first published online: 22 MAR 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2011.01022.x
© 2011 The Authors. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging © 2011 Scandinavian Society of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine
Additional Information
How to Cite
Yasuda, T., Ogasawara, R., Sakamaki, M., Bemben, M. G. and Abe, T. (2011), Relationship between limb and trunk muscle hypertrophy following high-intensity resistance training and blood flow–restricted low-intensity resistance training. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging, 31: 347–351. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2011.01022.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 19 JUL 2011
- Article first published online: 22 MAR 2011
- Accepted for publicationReceived 22 December 2010; accepted 1 March 2011
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- dynamic strength;
- magnetic resonance imaging;
- muscle CSA;
- strength training;
- vascular occlusion
Summary
We examined the relationship between training-induced limb and trunk muscle hypertrophy in high-intensity resistance training (HIT) or blood flow–restricted low-intensity resistance training (LI-BFR) programmes. Thirty young men were divided into three groups: HIT (n = 10), LI-BFR (n = 10) and non-training control (CON, n = 10). The HIT and LI-BFR groups performed 75% and 30%, respectively, of one-repetition maximal (1-RM) bench press exercise, 3 days per week for 6 weeks. During the training sessions, the LI-BFR group wore elastic cuffs around the most proximal region of both arms. Muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and 1-RM bench press strength were measured before and 3 days after the final training session. Total training volumes (lifting weight × number of repetitions) for all of the sessions were similar between the two training groups. The training led to a significant increase (P < 0·05) in bench press 1-RM in the two training groups, but not in the CON group. Triceps brachii and pectoralis major muscle CSA increased 8·8% and 15·8% (P < 0·01), respectively, in the HIT group and 4·9% (P < 0·05) and 8·3% (P < 0·01), respectively, in the LI-BFR group, but not in the CON group (−1·1% and 0·0%, respectively). There was significant correlation (r = 0·70, P < 0·05) between increases in triceps brachii and pectoralis major muscle CSA in the HIT group; however, the correlation was lower and non-significant in the LI-BFR group (r = 0·54). Our results suggest that limb and trunk muscle hypertrophy occurs simultaneously during HIT but not during LI-BFR, possibly owing to individual differences in activation of the arm and chest muscles during the training sessions.

1475-097X/asset/CPF_left.gif?v=1&s=581cad415e02c108d46507b9307b34ff40250885)
1475-097X/asset/CPF_right.gif?v=1&s=aec578d589a47dc572ff705d5d5a6ba3a1b75848)
