Ischemic Preconditioning and Muscle Force Capabilities

• Published in: Journal of strength and conditioning research 2021-08, Vol.35 (8), p.2187-2192
• Main Authors: Valenzuela, Pedro L., Martín-Candilejo, Rosalía, Sánchez-Martínez, Guillermo, Bouzas Marins, Joao Carlos, de la Villa, Pedro, Sillero-Quintana, Manuel
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Body mass; Cross-Over Studies; Exercise; Force; Humans; Ischemia; Ischemic Preconditioning; Male; Muscle, Skeletal; Muscles; Resistance Training; Thermography; Velocity; Warm-Up Exercise
• ISSN: 1064-8011; 1533-4287
• DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003104

ABSTRACTValenzuela, PL, Martín-Candilejo, R, Sánchez-Martínez, G, Bouzas Marins, JC, de la Villa, P, and Sillero-Quintana, M. Ischemic preconditioning and muscle force capabilities. J Strength Cond Res XX(X)000–000, 2019—This study analyzed the effects of ischemic preconditioning (IPC) on muscle force capabilities. Sixteen male subjects participated in this randomized, crossover, sham-controlled study. They were assigned to either IPC (3 × 5 minutes at 220 mm Hg in both arms with 5-minute rests) or a sham intervention (SHAM) (occlusion pressure set at 10 mm Hg). Forty minutes later, their force capabilities on the bench press exercise were assessed (load-velocity relationship with light, moderate, and heavy loads [30, 50, and 70% body mass, respectively]; 1 repetition maximum [1RM]; and number of repetitions to failure in 3 sets with 60% RM). The skin temperature (Tsk) of the pectoral and biceps muscles was analyzed as a secondary endpoint by means of infrared thermography. A significant decrease in the Tsk of the pectoral and biceps muscles was observed after the intervention (p < 0.01) and before the warm-up (p < 0.05) in IPC, but not in SHAM. However, exercise resulted in a similar Tsk increase in the pectoral muscles in both conditions (p > 0.05). No significant differences (p > 0.05 for all) were observed between conditions in the mean velocity attained with light (1.11 ± 0.11 and 1.09 ± 0.14 m·s, respectively), moderate (0.83 ± 0.14 and 0.83 ± 0.16 m·s), nor heavy loads (0.56 ± 0.17 and 0.54 ± 0.16 m·s), in 1RM (75.0 ± 18.9 and 73.1 ± 15.0 kg for IPC and SHAM, respectively; p = 0.181), nor in the number of repetitions performed (52 ± 13 and 54 ± 16 repetitions, p = 0.492). In summary, IPC decreased Tsk locally (biceps) and remotely (pectoral). However, it did not alter muscle force capabilities nor the Tsk response to exercise.