Lixandrão · Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) 2018 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=?

Magnitude of Muscle Strength and Mass Adaptations Between High-Load Resistance Training Versus Low-Load Resistance Training Associated with Blood-Flow Restriction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Cited 550 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials

PubMed 29043659 · doi:10.1007/s40279-017-0795-y · record verified 2026-08-30

What was done

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing high-load resistance training (> 65% of one-repetition maximum [1RM]) with low-load resistance training (< 50% 1RM) associated with blood-flow restriction (BFR-RT). Studies were identified via electronic databases based on criteria requiring pre- and post-training measurements of muscular strength and hypertrophy, direct comparison of high-load vs. BFR-RT, a PEDro scale score ≥ 4, and reporting of means and standard deviations (or standard errors) either directly or obtainable from authors.

What was found

The abstract reports no numerical effect sizes, confidence intervals, sample sizes, or p-values. High-load resistance training produced significantly higher increases in muscle strength compared with BFR-RT, even after accounting for test specificity, absolute occlusion pressure, cuff width, and occlusion pressure prescription. For muscle hypertrophy, high-load and BFR-RT produced similar effects regardless of absolute occlusion pressure, cuff width, or pressure prescription.

Why it matters

High-load resistance training remains the preferred method to maximize absolute muscle strength, but low-load blood-flow restriction training yields equivalent muscle hypertrophy, making it a viable alternative for clinical populations or individuals unable to tolerate heavy loading.

Limits

The abstract does not state the total number of included studies, overall participant count, demographic characteristics, or quantitative effect sizes and confidence intervals.

Cited by