ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2023
Effects of blood flow restriction training on bone turnover markers, microstructure, and biomechanics in rats.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blood Flow Restriction Training Prior to and After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Scoping Review.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Review
- Effects of low-intensity blood flow restriction training on myocardial injury indices, antioxidant and anti-apoptotic capacity in rats.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The present study aimed to investigate the effects of blood flow restriction training on muscle strength, bone tissue structure material, and biomechanical properties in rats applying various exercise interventions and to analyze the process by identifying the bone turnover markers, it provides a theoretical basis for the application of BFRT in clinical rehabilitation. Methods: A total of 24, 3-month-old male SD (Sprague Dawley) rats were randomly divided into pressurized control group (CON, n=6), low-intensity training group (LIRT, n=6), high-intensity training group (HIRT, n=6), and blood flow restriction training group (LIBFR, n=6) for 8-week ladder-climbing exercises. The pressured control group were given only ischemia treatments and did not undertake any burden. The low-intensity training group was allowed to climb the ladder with 30% of the maximum voluntary carrying capacity (MVCC). The rats in the high-intensity training group were allowed to climb the ladder with 70% MVCC. The blood flow restriction training group climbed the ladder with 30% MVCC while imposing blood flow restriction. Before sampling, the final MVCC was measured using a ladder-climbing protocol with progressively increasing weight loading. The serum, muscle, and bone were removed for sampling. The concentrations of the bone turnover markers PINP, BGP, and CTX in the serum were measured using ELISA. The bone mineral density and microstructure of femur bones were measured using micro-CT. Three-point bending and torsion tests were performed by a universal testing machine to measure the material mechanics and structural mechanics indexes of the femur bone. Results: The results of maximum strength test showed that the MVCC in LIRT, HIRT, and LIBFR groups was significantly greater than in the CON group, while the MVCC in the HIRT group was significantly higher than that in the LIRT group (P<0.05). According to the results of the bone turnover marker test, the concentrations of bone formation indexes PINP (amino-terminal extension peptide of type I procollagen) and BGP (bone gla protein) were significantly lower in the CON group than in the HIRT group (P<0.01), while those were significantly higher in the LIRT group compared to the HIRT group (P<0.01). In terms of bone resorption indexes, significant differences were identified only between the HIRT and other groups (P<0.05). The micro-CT examination revealed that the HIRT group had significantly greater bone density index values than the CON and LIRT groups (P<0.05). The results of three-point bending and torsion test by the universal material testing machine showed that the elastic modulus and maximum load indexes of the HIRT group were significantly smaller than those of the LIBFR group (P<0.05). The fracture load indexes in the HIRT group were significantly smaller than in the LIBFR group (P<0.05). Conclusion: 1. LIRT, HIRT, LIBFR, and CON all have significant differences, and this training helps to improve maximum strength, with HIRT being the most effective. 2. Blood flow restriction training can improve the expression of bone turnover markers, such as PINP and BGP, which promote bone tissue formation. 3. Blood flow restriction training can improve muscle strength and increase the positive development of bone turnover markers, thereby improving bone biomechanical properties such as bone elastic modulus and maximum load.
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.