SynthesisScientific reports2026
Effects of combined blood flow restriction and neuromuscular electrical stimulation on skeletal muscle hypertrophy in adults: a systematic review and meta analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Partial ischemia as molecular medicine: molecular mechanisms and clinical horizons of blood flow restriction training.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional resistance training is often prescribed to stimulate skeletal muscle hypertrophy in adults, however voluntary mechanical movement is not possible for all individuals. The combination of blood flow restriction and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (C-BFR-NMES) has recently been shown to be a passive intervention to promote skeletal muscle hypertrophy in adults. However, due to various protocols being used in the literature, varying amounts of skeletal muscle hypertrophy have been reported. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to quantitatively investigate the effectiveness of C-BFR-NMES compared to BFR or NMES alone, or no intervention to induce skeletal muscle mass in adults. The secondary aims were to compare muscle hypertrophy outcomes when different measurement devices are used following C-BFR-NMES, and to investigate the C-BFR-NMES protocols used to induce skeletal muscle hypertrophy in adults. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL were searched from inception to 28 February 2025 using the following inclusion criteria: (1) untrained healthy adults (between the age of 18–64 years), (2) study design allowed comparison between C-BFR-NMES and CONTROL (BFR or NMES alone, or no intervention), (3) lower limb skeletal muscle hypertrophy was assessed pre/post intervention, (4) interventions included study periods ≥ 14 days, and (5) manuscripts written in English. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) were calculated for each comparison, and a multilevel random-effects model was fitted. A total of 615 articles were screened, three studies with a total population of N = 37 were included, and seven meta-analyses were conducted. C-BFR-NMES induced non significant increases in skeletal muscle hypertrophy compared to CONTROL (p = 0.176), with a medium pooled effect size of d = 0.64 (95% CI -0.37 to 1.65) in favour of C-BFR-NMES. A pooled analysis of current data suggests the C-BFR-NMES may produce a medium positive effect on skeletal muscle hypertrophy in lower body musculature compared with control conditions; however, this effect was not statistically significant. Further larger randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of C-BFR-NMES, and applicability to upper body musculature, as well as different cohorts such as adolescent and older populations.
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.