Effects of Advanced Resistance Training Systems on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength in Recreationally Trained Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Advanced resistance training systems are widely used in practice, yet their comparative effectiveness for hypertrophy and maximal strength in recreationally trained adults remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated whether advanced methods provide superior adaptations to traditional multiple-set training and whether specific techniques confer distinct advantages for hypertrophy and maximal strength. Methods: A preregistered systematic search identified randomized and non-randomized controlled trials comparing advanced resistance training systems with traditional multiple-set protocols in recreationally trained adults aged 18–45 years. Outcomes included muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength. Random-effects and fixed-effects models with Knapp–Hartung adjustments were applied, and moderator analyses examined method type, volume equivalence and proximity to failure. Results: Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. When all outcomes were pooled, advanced systems produced a small but statistically significant advantage over traditional training (g = 0.159). Strength outcomes showed a moderate, significant benefit for advanced methods (g = 0.351), whereas hypertrophy effects were small and non-significant (g = 0.046). Rest-pause training demonstrated a modest hypertrophic advantage, while velocity-based training and eccentric overload contributed primarily to strength improvements. Drop sets, tempo-controlled training and cluster-type protocols produced adaptations comparable to traditional sets when volume and effort were matched. Across models, τ2 estimates were near zero, indicating minimal between-study heterogeneity. Conclusions: Advanced resistance training systems can be used effectively in recreationally trained adults and may offer advantages for maximal strength without compromising hypertrophy. Their hypertrophic superiority is not supported at the aggregate level, and their use should be guided by specific goals, constraints and individual preferences rather than expectations of universally greater muscle growth.