ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2020
[Application and effects of blood flow restriction training].
Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk factors and a predictive nomogram for in-hospital deep vein thrombosis in elderly patients with multiple chronic conditions.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Effects of Restricted Blood Flow Interval Training on Lower Extremity Muscles and Motor Function in Stroke Patients.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- The Effect of Blood Flow-Restricted Low Resistance Training on Microvascular Circulation of Myocardium in Spontaneously Hypertensive Rats.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- Blood flow restriction training promotes functional recovery of knee joint in patients after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: A randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood flow restriction (BFR) limits arterial and venous blood flow and leads to blood pooling, which could increase exercise-induced training effects. Strength training at lower intensities (20-30% of maximum strength) in combination with BFR showed similar effects on muscle hypertrophy as training with 70% without BFR. Low-intensity cycling endurance training with BFR improves muscle hypertrophy and endurance performance and activates angiogenesis. After determination of the complete occlusion pressure on the corresponding extremity, it is recommended that BFR training should be performed with 40-80% of the measured occlusion pressure. During strength training of the upper extremities, an occlusion of 60-80% leads to a reduction in the arterial blood flow by 20-50%. Local ischemia and hypoxia, a stronger metabolic stimulus, swelling of the muscle cells and the increased oxidative stress are discussed as causes for the increased training effects due to BFR. In short-term studies, comparable adjustments to parameters of fibrinolytic activity, coagulation and inflammation could be observed for strength training with and without BFR. So far, thromboses after BFR have been described only rarely but need to be further clarified by appropriate studies. The BFR training leads to a stronger activation of the muscular metabolic reflex and thus to a relatively greater increase in exercise blood pressure, so that cardiovascular parameters should be controlled during BFR training. First meta-analyses with small numbers of healthy people and patients indicate the effectiveness of BFR training. Standardization or guidelines for clinical use are still lacking.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32095904What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.