Trial reportPloS one2025
Cerebral cortical activation and muscle performance during blood flow restriction training after ischemic stroke: A randomised functional near-infrared spectroscopy study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo compare the effects of low-load (LL) blood flow restriction (BFR) and high-load (HL) training on cortical activation and the specific contributions of individual brain regions to functional recovery in stroke patients.
methodsSixty-six patients with ischemic stroke were divided into BFR (30% one-repetition maximum [1RM]), matched LL, or HL (80% 1RM) groups. Patients underwent a four-week supervised cycling program, and oxyhemoglobin (HbO) concentrations were assessed during the first session and after the program via functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Muscle performance was characterized by the rectus femoris muscle cross-sectional area (CSA), knee extensor peak torque (PT), and Fugl-Meyer lower extremity (FMLE) scores.
resultsCompared with the LL group, the BFR and HL groups presented significant brain activation (increased HbO concentration) during the first session (P < 0.05). Following the 4-week intervention, the BFR and HL groups presented greater changes in the HbO concentration (ΔHbO), PT and FMLE scores than did the LL group (P < 0.05). The ΔHbO values in the primary motor cortex (M1), premotor cortex and supplementary motor area (PMC-SMA) of the affected hemisphere (AH) were considerably greater than those in the unaffected hemisphere (P < 0.05), whereas there was no difference in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Changes in PT (mean r = 0.51 [range = 0.46-0.55]; P < 0.05) and FMLE scores (mean r = 0.54 [range = 0.48-0.62]; P < 0.05) were positively correlated with the AH M1 and PMC-SMA ΔHbO across groups. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: By actively manipulating the M1 and PMC-SMA, LL-BFR and HL training yield comparable short-term improvements in central and peripheral performance after stroke. (Registry: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; ChiCTR2400087378).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.