scholarly journals Effects of Detraining on Muscle Strength and Hypertrophy Induced by Resistance Training: A Systematic Review

Muscles ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Irismar G. A. Encarnação ◽  
Ricardo B. Viana ◽  
Saulo R. S. Soares ◽  
Eduardo D. S. Freitas ◽  
Claudio A. B. de Lira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Training Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Leg Press ◽  
Chronic Effects ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Present Systematic Review

A detraining period after resistance training causes a significant decrease in trained-induced muscular adaptations. However, it is unclear how long muscle strength and hypertrophy gains last after different detraining periods. Thus, the present systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the chronic effects of detraining on muscle strength and hypertrophy induced by resistance training. Searches were conducted on PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and Web of Science. The difference in means and pooled standard deviations of outcomes were converted into Hedges’ g effect sizes (g). Twenty randomized and non-randomized trials (high and moderate risks of bias, respectively, and fair quality) were included for qualitative analysis of muscle strength and hypertrophy, while only two studies were included in the meta-analysis for maximum muscle strength. The resistance training group presented a significant increase in one-repetition maximum (1RM) chest press (g: 4.43 [3.65; 5.22], p < 0.001) and 1RM leg press strength (g: 4.47 [2.12; 6.82], p < 0.001) after training. The strength gains observed in the resistance training group were also maintained after 16–24 weeks of detraining (g: 1.99 [0.62; 3.36], p = 0.004; and g: 3.16 [0.82; 5.50], p = 0.008; respectively), when compared to the non-exercise control group. However, 1RM chest press and leg press strength level was similar between groups after 32 (g: 1.81 [−0.59; 4.21], p = 0.139; and g: 2.34 [−0.48; 5.16], p = 0.104; respectively) and 48 weeks of detraining (g: 1.01 [−0.76; 2.79], p = 0.263; and g: 1.16 [−1.09; 3.42], p = 0.311; respectively). There was not enough data to conduct a meta-analysis on muscular hypertrophy. In conclusion, the present systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that, when taking random error into account, there is no sufficient high-quality evidence to make any unbiased claim about how long changes in muscle strength induced by RT last after a DT period. Moreover, the effect of different DT periods on muscle hypertrophy induced by RT remains unknown since there was not enough data to conduct a meta-analysis with this variable.

scholarly journals Whether stoma support rods have application value in loop enterostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Du ◽  
Jiajie Zhou ◽  
Feng Wang ◽  
Dongliang Li ◽  
Guifan Tong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Total Incidence ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Effect Of Support ◽  
Experimental Group

Abstract Purpose The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis is to analyze the application value of the stoma support rods in loop enterostomy. Methods The studies on the application of stoma rods in loop enterostomy published from January 2000 to January 2020 were searched in the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Clinical trials. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that observed the value of stoma rods were included according to inclusion criteria. The RevMan5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Results A total of 1131 patients with loop enterostomy in six studies were included in this study; there were 569 cases in the experimental group and 562 cases in the control group. All six studies analyzed the effect of support rods on the incidence of stoma retraction; the meta-analysis showed that in a total of 32 patients, stoma retraction occurred, with a total incidence of about 2.8% in 1131 patients. The incidence of stoma retraction in the rod group was not significantly lower than that in the non-rod group, and the difference was not statistically significant (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.32~1.32, I2 = 0%, P = 0.23), and the studies were homogeneous. The incidences of stoma necrosis (OR = 6.41, 95% CI 2.22~18.55, I2 = 0%, P = 0.0006), peristomal dermatitis (OR = 2.93, 95% CI 2.01~4.27, I2 = 0%, P < 0.00001), and mucocutaneous separation (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.03~4.47, I2 = 0%, P = 0.04) were significantly increased in the rod group. Conclusions It is not recommended to routinely use stoma support rods in the clinical practice.

scholarly journals The effects of resistance training with blood flow restriction on muscle strength, muscle hypertrophy and functionality in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review with meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0259574
Author(s):  
Leonardo Peterson dos Santos ◽  
Rafaela Cavalheiro do Espírito Santo ◽  
Thiago Rozales Ramis ◽  
Juliana Katarina Schoer Portes ◽  
Rafael Mendonça da Silva Chakr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Flow ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Muscle Mass ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Blood Flow Restriction ◽  
Flow Restriction ◽  
Low Intensity

Introduction Rheumatoid arthritis(RA) and osteoarthritis(OA) patients showed systemic manifestations that may lead to a reduction in muscle strength, muscle mass and, consequently, to a reduction in functionality. On the other hand, moderate intensity resistance training(MIRT) and high intensity resistance training(HIRT) are able to improve muscle strength and muscle mass in RA and OA without affecting the disease course. However, due to the articular manifestations caused by these diseases, these patients may present intolerance to MIRT or HIRT. Thus, the low intensity resistance training combined with blood flow restriction(LIRTBFR) may be a new training strategy for these populations. Objective To perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to verify the effects of LIRTBFR on muscle strength, muscle mass and functionality in RA and OA patients. Materials and methods A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials(RCTs), published in English, between 1957–2021, was conducted using MEDLINE(PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library. The methodological quality was assessed using Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. The risk of bias was assessed using RoB2.0. Mean difference(MD) or standardized mean difference(SMD) and 95% confidence intervals(CI) were pooled using a random-effects model. A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Five RCTs were included. We found no significant differences in the effects between LIRTBFR, MIRT and HIRT on muscle strength, which was assessed by tests of quadriceps strength(SMD = -0.01[-0.57, 0.54], P = 0.96; I² = 58%) and functionality measured by tests with patterns similar to walking(SMD = -0.04[-0.39, 0.31], P = 0.82; I² = 0%). Compared to HIRT, muscle mass gain after LIRTBFR was reported to be similar. When comparing LIRTBFR with low intensity resistance training without blood flow restriction(LIRT), the effect LIRTBFR was reported to be higher on muscle strength, which was evaluated by the knee extension test. Conclusion LIRTBFR appears to be a promising strategy for gains in muscle strength, muscle mass and functionality in a predominant sample of RA and OA women.

scholarly journals Protein Intakes Greater Than vs. at the RDA Differentially Affect Lean Body Mass Change to Purposeful Catabolic and Anabolic Stressors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (P08-075-19)

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Wang ◽  
Joshua Hudson ◽  
Robert Bergia ◽  
Wayne Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Lean Mass ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Energy Restriction ◽  
Mass Change ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Body Mass Change

Abstract Objectives Under stressful conditions such as energy restriction (ER) and resistance training (RT), recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for protein of 0.8 g/kg/d may no longer be an appropriate recommendation. Higher protein intakes are proposed to help promote, preserve, or attenuate the loss of lean mass. No known meta-analysis has been published previously that compares protein intakes greater than the RDA vs. the RDA as a control group. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of protein intake greater than versus at the RDA on changes in whole-body lean mass. Methods Three researchers independently screened 1531 articles published through August 2018 using PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases, with additional articles identified through previously published review articles. Randomized-controlled, parallel studies at least 6 weeks long with apparently healthy adults (> = 19 years old) were eligible for data extraction. (PROSPERO, CRD 42018106532). Results Data from 19 studies resulting in 23 comparisons of lean mass changes were included in the final analysis. This abstract presents sub-analyses for comparisons with catabolic and anabolic stimuli, specifically ER and/or RT, respectively. Among all comparisons, protein intakes greater than the RDA attenuated lean mass loss after ER [0.41 kg (0.15, 0.67); WMD (95% CI), n = 15 comparisons], but did not influence lean mass change without ER [0.23 kg (−0.44, 0.89), n = 8]. Protein intakes greater than the RDA increased lean mass after RT [0.77 kg (0.23, 1.31), n = 3], but not influence change in lean mass without RT [0.29 kg (−0.04, 0.62, n = 20]. Conclusions Protein intakes greater than the RDA positively influence changes in lean mass when adults are purposefully stressed by the catabolic stimulus of dietary energy restriction and/or the anabolic stimulus of resistance training. The RDA for protein is adequate for adults during non-stressed states. Funding Sources Purdue University Lynn Fellowship. No external funding was provided for this review.

Effects of Circuit Resistance Training on Body Composition, Strength, and Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Middle-Aged and Older Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Domingo Jesús Ramos-Campo ◽  
Luis Andreu-Caravaca ◽  
María Carrasco-Poyatos ◽  
Pedro J. Benito ◽  
Jacobo Ángel Rubio-Arias
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Body Composition ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Older Women ◽  
Cardiorespiratory Fitness ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Middle Aged ◽  
Circuit Resistance Training ◽  
Circuit Resistance

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effects of circuit resistance training (CRT) on cardiorespiratory fitness, strength, and body composition in middle-aged and older women. Sixteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The CRT interventions led to a significant decrease in weight, body mass index, and fat mass along with an increase in muscle mass. Significant differences were found in the fat mass and a trend to develop muscle mass when compared with the control group. CRT led to a significant increase in VO2max, walking endurance, and time to exhaustion; likewise, significant differences were observed when compared with the control group. CRT had a moderate and large favorable effect on arm, trunk, and lower limb strength. Furthermore, the increases in strength observed in the CRT were significantly greater than the changes observed in the control group. In middle-aged and older women, CRT improved cardiorespiratory fitness and strength and optimized body composition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document