Physiological adaptations and practical efficacy of different blood flow restriction resistance training modes in athletic populations.
Chuang He, Dinghuang Zhu, Yunzhou Hu
Abstract
Open AccessBlood flow restriction resistance training enhances athletic adaptations via distinct mechano-metabolic pathways. This review synthesizes evidence comparing three blood flow restriction resistance training modalities: Low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (using 20%-30% of one-repetition maximum) prioritizes metabolic stress (lactate and hydrogen ion accumulation, cellular swelling), activating growth hormone (GH)/insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1)/mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathways to promote type I muscle fiber hypertrophy, making it suitable for joint-sparing rehabilitation scenarios. Supplemental blood flow restriction resistance training programs combine high-load tension (utilizing 75%-90% of one-repetition maximum) with additional blood flow restriction to produce an acute synergistic effect. This method enhances the recruitment of type IIa/x muscle fibers and prolongs mTOR phosphorylation. Combined blood flow restriction resistance training employs alternating cycles of high-load phases (70%-85% 1RM) and blood flow restriction phases (hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha (HIF-1α)-mediated angiogenesis), optimizing phosphocreatine resynthesis and neural drive to achieve specialization of type IIx muscle fibers. Periodized application requires matching modalities with training phases: combined blood flow restriction training for hypertrophy during the preparatory phase, supplemental blood flow restriction training for strength maintenance during the competitive phase, and low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction for active recovery. This mechanistic framework supports evidence-based blood flow restriction resistance training programming to maximize athletic adaptations while mitigating injury risk.