Effect of Ischemic Preconditioning on Endurance Performance Does Not Surpass Placebo

Effect of Ischemic Preconditioning on Endurance Performance Does Not Surpass Placebo

Author Sabino-Carvalho, Jeann Lúccas Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
Lopes, Thiago Ribeiro Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
Obeid-Freitas, Tiago Google Scholar
Ferreira, Thiago Henrique Nunes Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
Succi, José Ernesto Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
Silva, Antonio Carlos da Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
Silva, Bruno Moreira Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
Abstract Purpose: Recent studies have reported ischemic preconditioning (IPC) can acutely improve endurance exercise performance in athletes. However, placebo and nocebo effects have not been sufficiently controlled, and the effect on aerobic metabolism parameters that determine endurance performance (e. g., oxygen cost of running, lactate threshold, and maximal oxygen uptake [(V)over dotO(2max)]) has been equivocal. Thus, we circumvented limitations from previous studies to test the effect of IPC on aerobic metabolism parameters and endurance performance in well-trained runners. Methods: Eighteen runners (14 men/4 women) were submitted to three interventions, in random order: IPC

sham intervention (SHAM)

and resting control (CT). Subjects were told both IPC and SHAM would improve performance compared to CT (i. e., similar placebo induction), and IPC would be harmless despite circulatory occlusion sensations (i. e., nocebo avoidance). Next, pulmonary ventilation and gas exchange, blood lactate concentration, and perceived effort were measured during a discontinuous incremental test on a treadmill. Then, a supramaximal test was used to verify the (V)over dotO(2max) and assess endurance performance (i. e., time to exhaustion). Results: Ventilation, oxygen uptake, carbon dioxide output, lactate concentration, and perceived effort were similar among IPC, SHAM, and CT throughout the discontinuous incremental test (P > 0.05). Oxygen cost of running, lactate threshold, and (V)over dotO(2max) were also similar among interventions (P > 0.05). Time to exhaustion was longer after IPC (mean +/- SEM, 165.34 +/- 12.34 s) and SHAM (164.38 +/- 11.71 s) than CT (143.98 +/- 12.09 s

P = 0.02 and 0.03, respectively), but similar between IPC and SHAM (P = 1.00). Conclusions: IPC did not change aerobic metabolism parameters, whereas improved endurance performance. The IPC improvement, however, did not surpass the effect of a placebo intervention.
xmlui.dri2xhtml.METS-1.0.item-coverage Philadelphia
Language English
Sponsor Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
Grant number FAPESP: 2014/15877-8
FAPESP: 2015/03572-0
FAPESP: 2014/25683-6
FAPESP: 2014/24294-6
CNPq: 461516/2014-4
Date 2017
Published in Medicine And Science In Sports And Exercise. Philadelphia, v. 49, n. 1, p. 124-132, 2017.
ISSN 0195-9131 (Sherpa/Romeo, impact factor)
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Extent 124-132
Origin http://dx.doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000001088
Access rights Closed access
Type Article
Web of Science ID WOS:000390027700015
URI https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/56522

Show full item record


File Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)




My Account