Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39835924›Full record

Trial reportExperimental physiology2025

Post-exercise neural plasticity is augmented by adding blood flow restriction during low work rate arm cycling.

Mikaela L Frechette, Summer B Cook, Brendan R Scott, Jane Tan, Ann-Maree Vallence

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Experimental physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mikaela L FrechetteDepartment of Kinesiology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7967-833X
Summer B CookDepartment of Kinesiology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4339-716X
Brendan R ScottPHysical Activity, Sport and Exercise (PHASE) Research Group, School of Allied Health (Exercise Science), Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2484-4019
Jane TanCentre for Healthy Ageing, Health Futures Institute, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0826-5391
Ann-Maree VallenceCentre for Healthy Ageing, Health Futures Institute, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9190-6366

Funding

Australian Research Council DE190100694International Research Opportunities Program (IROP), University of New Hampshire FrechetteNational Health and Medical Research Council GNT1196462
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood flow restriction (BFR) combined with low work rate exercise can enhance muscular and cardiovascular fitness. However, whether neural mechanisms mediate these enhancements remains unknown. This study examined changes in corticospinal excitability and motor cortical inhibition following arm cycle ergometry with and without BFR. Twelve healthy males (24 ± 4 years) completed four, randomized 15-min arm cycling conditions: high work rate (HW: 60% maximal power output), low work rate (LW: 30% maximal power output), low work rate with BFR (LW-BFR) and BFR without exercise (BFR-only). For BFR conditions, cuffs were applied around the upper arm and inflated to 70% of arterial occlusion pressure continuously during exercise. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered to left primary motor cortex (M1) to elicit motor-evoked potentials (MEP) in the right biceps brachii during a low-level isometric contraction. MEP amplitude and cortical silent period (cSP) duration were measured before and 1, 10 and 15 min post-exercise. MEP amplitude increased significantly from baseline to Post-10 and Post-15 for both the HW (both z < -7.07, both P < 0.001) and LW-BFR conditions (both z < -5.56, both P < 0.001). For the LW condition without BFR, MEP amplitude increased significantly from baseline to Post-10 (z = -3.53, P = 0.003) but not Post-15 (z = -1.85, P = 0.388). The current findings show that HW arm cycling and LW-BFR led to longer-lasting increases in corticospinal excitability than LW arm cycling alone. Future research should examine whether the increased corticospinal excitability is associated with the improvements in muscle strength observed with BFR exercise. A mechanistic understanding of BFR exercise improvement could guide BFR interventions in clinical populations.

Indexed as

ArmExerciseNeuronal PlasticityRegional Blood FlowAdultBicyclingElectromyographyEvoked Potentials, MotorHumansIsometric ContractionMaleMotor CortexMuscle, SkeletalPyramidal TractsTranscranial Magnetic StimulationYoung Adultblood flow restrictionexercise interventionhypoxiainhibitionmotor cortex excitabilityneural plasticity

Identifiers

PMID39835924
PMCPMC12128465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.