Acute responses to low-intensity aerobic exercise with continuous and intermittent blood flow restriction

Introduction This study examined muscular and cardiovascular responses to light-intensity aerobic exercise with different blood flow restriction (BFR) protocols. Methods Ten males performed four protocols on the cycle ergometer: low-intensity exercise with no BFR (LIE), LIE with continuous BFR (CONT-BFR), LIE with intermittent BFR (INT-BFR), and high-intensity exercise (HIE). Each protocol consisted of five 2-min work intervals (INT) at 35% of peak work rate for LIE, CONT-BFR, and INT-BFR and 70% of peak work rate for HIE. During CONT-BFR, cuffs were inflated to 60% of arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) at the start of INT 1 and remained inflated until the end of INT 5. During INT-BFR, cuffs were inflated to 60% of AOP during INTs and deflated during recovery intervals. Tissue oxygen saturation (StO 2 ) and rate pressure product (RPP) were measured to assess hypoxic stimulus and myocardial work, respectively. Results StO 2 response was similar between CONT-BFR (−23.2 ± 12.4 change from baseline arbitrary units ΔBSL AU), INT-BFR (−23.1 ± 13.1 ΔBSL AU), and HIE (−26.1 ± 13.1 ΔBSL AU); StO 2 response was the smallest in LIE (−2.8 ± 13.0 ΔBSL AU). RPP was not different between CONT-BFR (20,872.8 ± 2,393.3 mmHg·bpm) and INT-BFR (21,056.7 ± 2,701.5 mmHg·bpm), but both were lower than HIE (30,760.2 ± 1,729.1 mmHg·bpm). RPP during LIE (17,893.2 ± 2,202.6 mmHg·bpm) was lower than all protocols. Discussion There were no differences in hypoxic stress or myocardial work between BFR conditions. BFR conditions, regardless of restriction protocol, produced similar hypoxic stimulus with lower cardiac work compared to HIE; BFR protocol could be an alternative to HIE.