Acute effect of ultramarathon on systolic and diastolic cardiac function: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ultramarathon running poses physiological challenges, impacting cardiac function. This systematic review and meta-analysis explore the acute effects of single-stage ultramarathon running on cardiac function. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations were followed. Searches covered Medline, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Central Cochrane, and Scopus. Random effects meta-analyses assessed left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) variables, expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Among 6972 studies, 17 were included. Post-ultramarathon reductions were found in LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) (-1.24; 95% CI = -1.77, -0.71 mm), LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) (-9.92; 95% CI = -15.25, -4.60 ml), LV stroke volume (LVSV) (-8.96 ml, 95% CI -13.20, -4.72 ml), LV ejection fraction (LVEF) (-3.71; 95% CI = -5.21, -2.22%), LV global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) (-1.48; 95% CI = -2.21, -0.76%), E/A (-0.30; 95% CI = -0.38, -0.22 cm/s), .E' (-1.35 cm/s, 95% CI -1.91, -0.79 cm/s), RV fractional area change (RVFAC) (-3.34, 95% CI = -5.84, -0.84%), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) (-0.12, 95% CI = -0.22, -0.02 cm), RV global longitudinal strain (RVGLS) (-1.73, 95% CI = -2.87, -0.59%), with increases in RV end-diastolic area (RVEDA) (1.89, 95% CI = 0.63, 3.14 cm2), RV Peak A' (1.32 cm/s, 95% CI 0.20, 2.44), and heart rate (18.24, 95% CI = 15.16, 21.32). No significant differences were observed in LV end-systolic diameter (LVESD), LV end-systolic volume (LVESV), RV end-diastolic diameter (RVEDD), RV Peak E', and RV Peak S'. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests immediate impairment of systolic and diastolic cardiac function post-ultramarathon running.

Effects of Resistance Training to Muscle Failure on Acute Fatigue: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Proper design of resistance training (RT) variables is a key factor to reach the maximum potential of neuromuscular adaptations. Among those variables, the use of RT performed to failure (RTF) may lead to a different magnitude of acute fatigue compared with RT not performed to failure (RTNF). The fatigue response could interfere with acute adaptive changes, in turn regulating long-term adaptations. Considering that the level of fatigue affects long-term adaptations, it is important to determine how fatigue is affected by RTF versus RTNF. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the effects of RTF versus RTNF on acute fatigue. METHODS: The search was conducted in January 2021 in seven databases. Only studies with a crossover design that investigated the acute biomechanical properties (vertical jump height, velocity of movement, power output, or isometric strength), metabolic response (lactate or ammonia concentration), muscle damage (creatine kinase activity), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) were selected. The data (mean ± standard deviation and sample size) were extracted from the included studies and were either converted into the standardized mean difference (SMD) or maintained in the raw mean difference (RMD) when the studies reported the results in the same scale. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included in the systematic review and 12 were included in the meta-analysis. The main meta-analyses indicated greater decrease of biomechanical properties for RTF compared with RTNF (SMD - 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 1.43 to - 0.49, p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a larger increase in metabolic response (RMD 4.48 mmol·L-1, 95% CI 3.19-5.78, p < 0.001), muscle damage (SMD 0.76, 95% CI 0.31-1.21, p = 0.001), and RPE (SMD 1.93, 95% CI 0.87-3.00, p < 0.001) for RTF compared with RTNF. Further exploratory subgroup analyses showed that training status (p = 0.92), timepoint (p = 0.89), load (p = 0.10), and volume (p = 0.12) did not affect biomechanical properties; however, greater loss in the movement velocity test occurred on upper limbs compared with lower limbs (p < 0.001). Blood ammonia concentration was greater after RTF than RTNF (RMD 44.66 µmol·L-1, 95% CI 32.27-57.05, p < 0.001), as was 48 h post-exercise blood creatine kinase activity (SMD 0.86, 95% CI 0.33-1.42, p = 0.002). Furthermore, although there was considerable heterogeneity in the overall analysis (I2 = 83.72%; p < 0.01), a significant difference in RPE after RTF compared with RTNF was only found for studies that did not equalize training volumes. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, RTF compared with RTNF led to a greater decrease in biomechanical properties and a simultaneous increase in metabolic response, higher muscle damage, and RPE. The exploratory analyses suggested a greater impairment in the velocity of movement test for the upper limbs, more pronounced muscle damage 48 h post-exercise, and a greater RPE in studies with non-equalized volume after the RTF session compared with RTNF. Therefore, it can be concluded that RTF leads to greater acute fatigue compared with RTNF. The higher acute fatigue after RTF can also have an important impact on chronic adaptive processes following RT; however, the greater acute fatigue following RTF can extend the time needed for recovery, which should be considered when RTF is used. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The original protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42020192336) in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

Effects of Resistance Training Performed with Different Loads in Untrained and Trained Male Adult Individuals on Maximal Strength and Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review.

The load in resistance training is considered to be a critical variable for neuromuscular adaptations. Therefore, it is important to assess the effects of applying different loads on the development of maximal strength and muscular hypertrophy. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature and compare the effects of resistance training that was performed with low loads versus moderate and high loads in untrained and trained healthy adult males on the development of maximal strength and muscle hypertrophy during randomized experimental designs. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (2021) were followed with the eligibility criteria defined according to participants, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design (PICOS): (P) healthy males between 18 and 40 years old, (I) interventions performed with low loads, (C) interventions performed with moderate or high loads, (O) development of maximal strength and muscle hypertrophy, and (S) randomized experimental studies with between- or within-subject parallel designs. The literature search strategy was performed in three electronic databases (Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science) on 22 August 2021. Results: Twenty-three studies with a total of 563 participants (80.6% untrained and 19.4% trained) were selected. The studies included both relative and absolute loads. All studies were classified as being moderate-to-high methodological quality, although only two studies had a score higher than six points. The main findings indicated that the load magnitude that was used during resistance training influenced the dynamic strength and isometric strength gains. In general, comparisons between the groups (i.e., low, moderate, and high loads) showed higher gains in 1RM and maximal voluntary isometric contraction when moderate and high loads were used. In contrast, regarding muscle hypertrophy, most studies showed that when resistance training was performed to muscle failure, the load used had less influence on muscle hypertrophy. The current literature shows that gains in maximal strength are more pronounced with high and moderate loads compared to low loads in healthy adult male populations. However, for muscle hypertrophy, studies indicate that a wide spectrum of loads (i.e., 30 to 90% 1RM) may be used for healthy adult male populations.

Effects of whole-body electromyostimulation on function, muscle mass, strength, social participation, and falls-efficacy in older people: A randomized trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Resistance training has a positive impact on functional capacity and muscle mass in the elderly. However, due to physical limitations or a simple aversion against regular exercise, a majority of the elderly do not reach the recommended exercise doses. This led us to evaluate the effect of whole-body electromyostimulation (WB-EMS), a novel, time-efficient, and smooth training technology on physical function, fat-free mass, strength, falls-efficacy, and social participation of the elderly. METHODS: The present study is a randomized, parallel group clinical trial approved by the Ethics Committee of our Institution. Sixty-six volunteers (age ≥ 60 years) will be recruited from the geriatric outpatient department in a tertiary hospital and primary care units and randomized into two groups: WB-EMS group or active control group (aCG). The WB-EMS or aCG protocol will consist of 16 sessions for 8 consecutive weeks, twice per week. The primary outcomes will be maximal isometric knee extension (IKE), functional lower extremity strength, fat-free mass, gait speed, and risk of falls measured before and after intervention. The secondary outcomes will be social participation and falls-efficacy assessed before and after the intervention and at three and six months of follow-up. Participant's satisfaction with and awareness of electrical stimulation therapy will also be assessed immediately after the 8-week intervention. DISCUSSION: Patients receiving WB-EMS exercises are believed to have better outcomes than those receiving conventional, more time-consuming resistance exercises. Hence, innovative, time-efficient, joint-friendly, and highly individualized exercise technologies (such as WB-EMS) may be a good choice for the elderly with time constraints, physical limitations, or little enthusiasm, who are exercising less than the recommended amounts for impact on muscle mass, strength, and function.