Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2021
Blood flow restriction in the presence or absence of muscle contractions does not preserve vasculature structure and function following 14-days of limb immobilization.
Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impacts of Physical Inactivity Models on Endothelial Function: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Pooled it
- Hemodynamic analysis of blood flow restriction training: a systematic review.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Age-Dependent Decline in Common Femoral Artery Flow-Mediated Dilation and Wall Shear Stress in Healthy Subjects.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Detrimental effects of physical inactivity on peripheral and brain vasculature in humans: Insights into mechanisms, long-term health consequences and protective strategies.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeLimb immobilization causes local vasculature to experience detrimental adaptations. Simple strategies to increase blood flow (heating, fidgeting) successfully prevent acute (≤ 1 day) impairments; however, none have leveraged the hyperemic response over prolonged periods (weeks) mirroring injury rehabilitation. Throughout a 14-day unilateral limb immobilization, we sought to preserve vascular structure and responsiveness by repeatedly activating a reactive hyperemic response via blood flow restriction (BFR) and amplifying this stimulus by combining BFR with electric muscle stimulation (EMS).
methodsYoung healthy adults (M:F = 14:17, age = 22.4 ± 3.7 years) were randomly assigned to control, BFR, or BFR + EMS groups. BFR and BFR + EMS groups were treated for 30 min twice daily (3 × 10 min ischemia-reperfusion cycles; 15% maximal voluntary contraction EMS), 5 days/week (20 total sessions). Before and after immobilization, artery diameter, flow-mediated dilation (FMD) and blood flow measures were collected in the superficial femoral artery (SFA).
resultsFollowing immobilization, there was less retrograde blood velocity (+ 1.8 ± 3.6 cm s
conclusionFollowing immobilization, our results reveal (1) neither BFR nor BFR + EMS mitigate artery structure impairments, (2) intervention-induced shear stress did not affect vascular function assessed by FMD, and (3) retrograde blood velocity is reduced at rest offering potential insight to mechanisms of flow regulation. In conclusion, BFR appears insufficient as a treatment strategy for preventing macrovascular dysfunction during limb immobilization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.