Cargando…

Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study

Introduction: The determination of the optimal occlusion level is a key parameter in blood flow restriction (BFR). This study aimed to compare the effects of elastic (BStrong) vs. nylon (Hokanson) BFR cuffs on blood flow in the lower and upper limbs. Methods: Eleven healthy participants undertook se...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Citherlet, Tom, Willis, Sarah J., Chaperon, Audrey, Millet, Grégoire P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9360536/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35957986
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.931270
_version_ 1784764341995700224
author Citherlet, Tom
Willis, Sarah J.
Chaperon, Audrey
Millet, Grégoire P.
author_facet Citherlet, Tom
Willis, Sarah J.
Chaperon, Audrey
Millet, Grégoire P.
author_sort Citherlet, Tom
collection PubMed
description Introduction: The determination of the optimal occlusion level is a key parameter in blood flow restriction (BFR). This study aimed to compare the effects of elastic (BStrong) vs. nylon (Hokanson) BFR cuffs on blood flow in the lower and upper limbs. Methods: Eleven healthy participants undertook several BFR sessions with 2 different cuffs of similar width on their lower and upper limbs at different pressures [200, 250, 300, 350, and 400 mmHg for BStrong and 0, 40, and 60% of the arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) for Hokanson]. Doppler ultrasound recorded blood flows through the brachial and femoral artery at rest. Results: With BStrong, only 350 and 400 mmHg pressures were significantly different from resting values (0% AOP). With Hokanson, both 40% and 60% of the AOP were significantly different from resting values (p < 0.05). Discussion: While both cuffs elicited BFR, they failed to accurately modulate blood flow. Hokanson is appropriate for research settings while BStrong appears to be a convenient tool for practitioners due to its safety (i.e., the impossibility of completely occluding arteries) and the possibility of exercising freely detached from the pump.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9360536
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93605362022-08-10 Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study Citherlet, Tom Willis, Sarah J. Chaperon, Audrey Millet, Grégoire P. Front Physiol Physiology Introduction: The determination of the optimal occlusion level is a key parameter in blood flow restriction (BFR). This study aimed to compare the effects of elastic (BStrong) vs. nylon (Hokanson) BFR cuffs on blood flow in the lower and upper limbs. Methods: Eleven healthy participants undertook several BFR sessions with 2 different cuffs of similar width on their lower and upper limbs at different pressures [200, 250, 300, 350, and 400 mmHg for BStrong and 0, 40, and 60% of the arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) for Hokanson]. Doppler ultrasound recorded blood flows through the brachial and femoral artery at rest. Results: With BStrong, only 350 and 400 mmHg pressures were significantly different from resting values (0% AOP). With Hokanson, both 40% and 60% of the AOP were significantly different from resting values (p < 0.05). Discussion: While both cuffs elicited BFR, they failed to accurately modulate blood flow. Hokanson is appropriate for research settings while BStrong appears to be a convenient tool for practitioners due to its safety (i.e., the impossibility of completely occluding arteries) and the possibility of exercising freely detached from the pump. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9360536/ /pubmed/35957986 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.931270 Text en Copyright © 2022 Citherlet, Willis, Chaperon and Millet. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Physiology
Citherlet, Tom
Willis, Sarah J.
Chaperon, Audrey
Millet, Grégoire P.
Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study
title Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study
title_full Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study
title_fullStr Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study
title_full_unstemmed Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study
title_short Differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: A pilot study
title_sort differences in the limb blood flow between two types of blood flow restriction cuffs: a pilot study
topic Physiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9360536/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35957986
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.931270
work_keys_str_mv AT citherlettom differencesinthelimbbloodflowbetweentwotypesofbloodflowrestrictioncuffsapilotstudy
AT willissarahj differencesinthelimbbloodflowbetweentwotypesofbloodflowrestrictioncuffsapilotstudy
AT chaperonaudrey differencesinthelimbbloodflowbetweentwotypesofbloodflowrestrictioncuffsapilotstudy
AT milletgregoirep differencesinthelimbbloodflowbetweentwotypesofbloodflowrestrictioncuffsapilotstudy