Continuous blood flow restriction during repeated-sprint exercise increases peripheral but not systemic physiological and perceptual demands.

This study examined the impact of continuous blood flow restriction (BFR) during repeated-sprint exercise (RSE) on acute performance, peripheral, systemic physiological, and perceptual responses. In a randomized crossover design, 26 adult male semi-professional and amateur team-sport players completed two RSE sessions (3 sets of 5 × 5-s sprints with 25 s of passive recovery and 3 min of rest) with continuous BFR (45% arterial occlusion; excluding during between-set rest periods) or without (non-BFR). Mean and peak power output were significantly lower (p < 0.001) during BFR compared to non-BFR (dz = 0.85 and 0.77, respectively). Minimum tissue saturation index during the sprints and rest periods was significantly reduced (p < 0.001) for BFR (dz = 1.26 and 1.21, respectively). Electromyography root mean square was significantly decreased (p < 0.01) for biceps femoris and lateral gastrocnemius muscles during BFR (dz = 0.35 and 0.79, respectively), but remained unchanged for the vastus lateralis muscle in both conditions. Oxygen consumption and minute ventilation were significantly reduced (both p < 0.01) for BFR (dz = 1.46 and 0.43, respectively). Perceived limb discomfort was significantly higher (p < 0.001) for BFR (dz = 0.78). No differences (p > 0.05) in blood lactate concentration or rating of perceived exertion were observed between conditions. Blood flow-restricted RSE reduced performance and likely increased the physiological and perceptual stimulus for the periphery with greater reliance on anaerobic glycolysis, despite comparable or decreased systemic demands.

Repeated-Sprint Training With Blood-Flow Restriction Improves Repeated-Sprint Ability Similarly to Unrestricted Training at Reduced External Loads.

PURPOSE: This study examined performance and physiological adaptations following 3 weeks of repeated-sprint training (RST) with blood-flow restriction (BFR) or without (non-BFR). METHODS: Twenty-six semiprofessional and amateur adult male team-sport players were assessed for repeated-sprint ability, anaerobic capacity, leg lean mass, neuromuscular function, and maximal aerobic capacity before and after RST. Participants completed 9 cycling RST sessions (3 sets of 5-7 × 5-s sprints, 25-s passive recovery, 3-min rest) over a 3-week period with BFR or non-BFR. RESULTS: During RST sessions, the BFR group demonstrated lower mean power output compared with non-BFR (-14.5%; g = 1.48; P = .001). Significant improvements (P < .05) in mean and peak power output during repeated-sprint ability (+4.1%; g = 0.42, and + 2.2%; g = 0.25, respectively) and anaerobic capacity (+4.8%; g = 0.47, and + 4.7%; g = 0.32, respectively) tests, leg lean mass (+2.0%; g = 0.16), and peak aerobic power (+3.3%; g = 0.25) were observed from pretesting to posttesting without any between-groups differences. No significant changes (P > .05) were observed for maximal isometric voluntary contraction and maximal aerobic capacity. Peak rate of force development decreased (P = .003) in both groups following RST (-14.6%; g = 0.65), without any between-groups differences. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated-sprint ability, anaerobic capacity, leg lean mass, and peak aerobic power improved following 3 weeks of RST; however, the addition of BFR did not further enhance adaptations. Interestingly, comparable improvements were achieved between groups despite lower external loads experienced during RST sessions with BFR.

Manipulating Internal and External Loads During Repeated Cycling Sprints: A Comparison of Continuous and Intermittent Blood Flow Restriction.

ABSTRACT: Mckee, JR, Girard, O, Peiffer, JJ, and Scott, BR. Manipulating internal and external loads during repeated cycling sprints: A comparison of continuous and intermittent blood flow restriction. J Strength Cond Res 38(1): 47-54, 2024-This study examined the impact of blood flow restriction (BFR) application method (continuous vs. intermittent) during repeated-sprint exercise (RSE) on performance, physiological, and perceptual responses. Twelve adult male semi-professional Australian football players completed 4 RSE sessions (3 × [5 × 5-second maximal sprints:25-second passive recovery], 3-minute rest between the sets) with BFR applied continuously (C-BFR; excluding interset rest periods), intermittently during only sprints (I-BFR WORK ), or intraset rest periods (I-BFR REST ) or not at all (Non-BFR). An alpha level of p < 0.05 was used to determine significance. Mean power output was greater for Non-BFR ( p < 0.001, dz = 1.58 ), I-BFR WORK ( p = 0.002, dz = 0.63 ), and I-BFR REST ( p = 0.003, dz = 0.69 ) than for C-BFR and for Non-BFR ( p = 0.043, dz = 0.55 ) compared with I-BFR REST . Blood lactate concentration ( p = 0.166) did not differ between the conditions. Mean oxygen consumption was higher during Non-BFR ( p < 0.001, dz = 1.29 and 2.31; respectively) and I-BFR WORK ( p < 0.001, dz = 0.74 and 1.63; respectively) than during I-BFR REST and C-BFR and for I-BFR REST ( p = 0.002, dz = 0.57) compared with C-BFR. Ratings of perceived exertion were greater for I-BFR REST ( p = 0.042, dz = 0.51) and C-BFR ( p = 0.011, dz = 0.90) than for Non-BFR and during C-BFR ( p = 0.023, dz = 0.54) compared with I-BFR WORK . Applying C-BFR or I-BFR REST reduced mechanical output and cardiorespiratory demands of RSE and were perceived as more difficult. Practitioners should be aware that BFR application method influences internal and external demands during RSE.

An Updated Panorama of Blood-Flow-Restriction Methods.

BACKGROUND: Exercise with blood-flow restriction (BFR) is being increasingly used by practitioners working with athletic and clinical populations alike. Most early research combined BFR with low-load resistance training and consistently reported increased muscle size and strength without requiring the heavier loads that are traditionally used for unrestricted resistance training. However, this field has evolved with several different active and passive BFR methods emerging in recent research. PURPOSE: This commentary aims to synthesize the evolving BFR methods for cohorts ranging from healthy athletes to clinical or load-compromised populations. In addition, real-world considerations for practitioners are highlighted, along with areas requiring further research. CONCLUSIONS: The BFR literature now incorporates several active and passive methods, reflecting a growing implementation of BFR in sport and allied health fields. In addition to low-load resistance training, BFR is being combined with high-load resistance exercise, aerobic and anaerobic energy systems training of varying intensities, and sport-specific activities. BFR is also being applied passively in the absence of physical activity during periods of muscle disuse or rehabilitation or prior to exercise as a preconditioning or performance-enhancement technique. These various methods have been reported to improve muscular development; cardiorespiratory fitness; functional capacities; tendon, bone, and vascular adaptations; and physical and sport-specific performance and to reduce pain sensations. However, in emerging BFR fields, many unanswered questions remain to refine best practice.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

The Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry offers this review of the 2022 dental literature to briefly touch on several topics of interest to modern restorative dentistry. Each committee member brings discipline-specific expertise in their subject areas that include (in order of the appearance in this report): prosthodontics; periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; dental materials and therapeutics; occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; sleep-related breathing disorders; oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and dental caries and cariology. The authors focused their efforts on reporting information likely to influence the daily dental treatment decisions of the reader with an emphasis on innovations, new materials and processes, and future trends in dentistry. With the tremendous volume of literature published daily in dentistry and related disciplines, this review cannot be comprehensive. Instead, its purpose is to update interested readers and provide valuable resource material for those willing to subsequently pursue greater detail on their own. Our intent remains to assist colleagues in navigating the tremendous volume of newly minted information produced annually. Finally, we hope that readers find this work helpful in managing patients.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

The Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry offers this review of the 2021 dental literature in restorative dentistry to inform busy dentists regarding noteworthy scientific and clinical progress over the past year. Each member of the committee brings discipline-specific expertise to coverage of this broad topical area. Specific subject areas addressed, in order of the appearance in this report, include COVID-19 and the dental profession (new); prosthodontics; periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; implant dentistry; dental materials and therapeutics; occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; sleep-related breathing disorders; oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and dental caries and cariology. The authors focused their efforts on reporting information likely to influence daily dental treatment decisions with an emphasis on future trends in dentistry. With the tremendous volume of dentistry and related literature being published daily, this review cannot possibly be comprehensive. Rather, its purpose is to update interested readers and provide important resource material for those interested in pursuing greater details on their own. It remains our intent to assist colleagues in negotiating the extensive volume of important information being published annually. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in successfully managing the patients and dental problems they encounter.

Structure-activity relationship of 2-aminodibenzothiophene pharmacophore and the discovery of aminobenzothiophenes as potent inhibitors of Mycobacterium smegmatis.

Tuberculosis (TB) is one of the deadliest infectious diseases worldwide and its current treatments have been complicated with the emergence of multi-drug resistant (MDR-TB) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR-TB) strains. Therefore, the discovery of new antitubercular agents is in need to overcome this problem. In our efforts to discover novel candidates for the treatment of tuberculosis, we describe in this work in vitro activityagainstM. smegmatis for a series of aminated benzo-fused heterocycles, particularly, dibenzothiophene to explore the structure-activity relationship of 2-aminodibenzothiophene 3aa. From these studies, three compounds 5-aminobenzothiophene 3ia, 6-aminobenzothiophene 3ma (MIC: 0.78 µg/mL) and 5-aminobenzofuran 3ja (MIC: 1.56 µg/mL) were identified as potent inhibitors of M. smegmatis with low cytotoxicity. These results suggested the significance of these compounds 3ia, 3ja and 3ma for the future development of candidate agents to treat tuberculosis.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

The Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry offers this review of the 2020 professional literature in restorative dentistry to inform busy dentists regarding noteworthy scientific and clinical progress over the past year. Each member of the committee brings discipline-specific expertise to this work to cover this broad topic. Specific subject areas addressed include prosthodontics; periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; implant dentistry; dental materials and therapeutics; occlusion and temporomandibular disorders (TMDs); sleep-related breathing disorders; oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and dental caries and cariology. The authors focused their efforts on reporting information likely to influence day-to-day dental treatment decisions with a keen eye on future trends in the profession. With the tremendous volume of dentistry and related literature being published today, this review cannot possibly be comprehensive. The purpose is to update interested readers and provide important resource material for those interested in pursuing greater detail. It remains our intent to assist colleagues in navigating the extensive volume of important information being published annually. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in successfully managing the dental patients they encounter.

Temporal Location of High-Intensity Interval Training in Cycling Does Not Impact the Time Spent Near Maximal Oxygen Consumption.

PURPOSE: To examine the influence of temporal location of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) within a cycling session on the time spent ≥90% of maximal oxygen consumption and physiological and perceptual responses. METHODS: In a randomized, crossover design, 16 trained cyclists (male, n = 13 and female, n = 3) completed three 90-minute cycling sessions with HIIT placed at the beginning, middle, or end of the session (13, 36, and 69 min, respectively). Intervals consisted of three 3-minute efforts at 90% of the power output associated with maximal oxygen consumption interspersed with 3 minutes of recovery. Oxygen consumption, minute ventilation, respiratory rate, and heart rate were recorded continuously during work intervals. Rate of perceived exertion was recorded at the end of work intervals, and sessional rate of perceived exertion was collected 20 minutes after session completion. RESULTS: No differences were observed for mean oxygen consumption (P = .479) or time spent ≥90% maximal oxygen consumption (P = .753) between condition. The mean rate of perceived exertion of all intervals were greater in the Middle (P < .01, effect size = 0.83) and End (P < .05, effect size = 0.75) compared with Beginning conditions. Mean minute ventilation was greater in the End compared with Beginning condition (P = .015, effect size = 0.63). However, no differences in mean respiratory rate were observed between conditions (P = .297). CONCLUSIONS: Temporal location of HIIT has no impact on oxygen consumption or cardiovascular stress within a cycling session. However, HIIT performed later in the session resulted in higher ventilation, which may indicate the need for greater anaerobic contribution to these intervals.

One-Pot Synthesis of Aminated Benzo-Fused Heterocycles and N-Substituted Dibenzothiophenes via Copper-Catalyzed Ullmann Type Reaction.

We report here a direct and effective method to synthesize a primary amine of several polycyclic aromatic compounds. This reaction has been achieved through copper (I)-catalyzed Ullmann C-N coupling. Furthermore, this strategy allows the synthesis of new N-substituted dibenzothiophene derivatives through the coupling of 2-bromodibenzothiophene with various ranges of primary and secondary amines. The use of inexpensive catalysts, aqueous ammonia as the convenient source of ammonia and ligand free, makes this protocol environmentally and economically favorable for the synthesis of these compounds.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

This comprehensive review of the 2019 restorative dental literature is offered to inform busy dentists regarding remarkable publications and noteworthy progress made in the profession. Developed by the Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry, each author brings discipline-specific expertise to 1 of 8 sections of the report: (1) prosthodontics; (2) periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; (3) implant dentistry; (4) dental materials and therapeutics; (5) occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; (6) sleep-related breathing disorders; (7) oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and (8) dental caries and cariology. The report targets important information likely to influence day-to-day dental treatment decisions. Each review is not intended to stand alone but to update interested readers so that they may visit source material when greater detail is desired. As the profession moves toward evidence-based clinical decision-making, an incredible volume of potentially valuable dental literature continues to increase. It is the intention of this review and its authors to provide assistance in negotiating the extensive dental literature published in 2019. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in the clinical management of dental patients.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

This comprehensive review of the 2018 dental literature is provided to inform busy dentists about progress in the profession. Developed by the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry, each author brings discipline-specific expertise to one of the 8 sections of the report including (1) prosthodontics; (2) periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; (3) implant dentistry; (4) dental materials and therapeutics; (5) occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; (6) sleep-related breathing disorders; (7) oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and (8) dental caries and cariology. The report targets important information that will likely influence day-to-day treatment decisions. Each review is not intended to stand alone but to update interested readers so that they may visit source materials if greater detail is desired. As the profession continues its march toward evidence-based clinical decision-making, an already voluminous library of potentially valuable dental literature continues to grow. It is the intention of this review and its authors to provide assistance in navigating the extensive dental literature published in 2018. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in the clinical management of patients moving forward.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

PROBLEM: There are countless numbers of scientific studies published in countless scientific journals on subjects related to restorative dentistry. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to review pertinent scientific studies published in 2017 on topics of interest to restorative dentists. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The authors, considered to be experts in their disciplines searched the scientific literature in 7 different areas (prosthodontics, periodontics, dental materials, occlusion and temporomandibular disorders, sleep-disordered breathing, oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery and dental caries). Pertinent articles were either identified and referenced or reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 437 articles in 7 disciplines were identified or reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: An impressive amount of scientific literature related to restorative dentistry was published in 2017. The evidence presented in this article can assist dentists in the practice of contemporary evidence-based dentistry.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: Report of the committee on scientific investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

This review was conducted to assist the busy dentist in keeping abreast of the latest scientific information regarding the clinical practice of dentistry. Each of the authors, who are considered experts in their disciplines, was asked to peruse the scientific literature in their discipline published in 2016 and review the articles for important information that may affect treatment decisions. Comments on experimental methodology, statistical evaluation, and the overall validity of conclusions are included with many of the reviews. The reviews are not meant to stand alone but are intended to inform the interested reader about what has been discovered in the past year. The readers are then invited to go to the source, if they want more detail.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: Report of the committee on scientific investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: It is clear the contemporary dentist is confronted with a blizzard of information regarding materials and techniques from journal articles, advertisements, newsletters, the internet, and continuing education events. While some of that information is sound and helpful, much of it is misleading at best. PURPOSE: This review identifies and discusses the most important scientific findings regarding outcomes of dental treatment to assist the practitioner in making evidence-based choices. This review was conducted to assist the busy dentist in keeping abreast of the latest scientific information regarding the clinical practice of dentistry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Each of the authors, who are considered experts in their disciplines, was asked to peruse the scientific literature published in 2015 in their discipline and review the articles for important information that may have an impact on treatment decisions. Comments on experimental methodology, statistical evaluation, and overall validity of the conclusions are included in many of the reviews. RESULTS: The reviews are not meant to stand alone but are intended to inform the interested reader about what has been discovered in the past year. The readers are then invited to go to the source if they wish more detail. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the scientific literature published in 2015 is divided into 7 sections, dental materials, periodontics, prosthodontics, occlusion and temporomandibular disorders, sleep-disordered breathing, cariology, and implant dentistry.