Different Levels of Eccentric Resistance during Eight Weeks of Training Affect Muscle Strength and Lean Tissue Mass

Coupling concentric and eccentric muscle contractions appears to be important in the development of muscle strength and hypertrophy. The interim Resistive Exercise Device (iRED) currently used aboard the International Space Station does not seem to be as effective as free weight training in ambulatory subjects and has not completely protected against muscular deconditioning due to space flight. The lack of protection during space flight could be caused by iRED's proportionally lower eccentric resistance (60-70%) compared to concentric resistance. PURPOSE: To determine the effects of 8 wks of lower body resistive exercise training using five levels of eccentric resistance on muscle strength and lean tissue mass. METHODS: Forty untrained males (34.9 +/- 7 yrs, 80.9 +/- 9.8 kg, 178.2 +/- 7.1 cm; mean +/- SD) completed three 1-repetition maximum (1-RM) strength tests for both the supine leg press (LP) and supine heel raise (HR) prior to training; subjects were matched for LP strength and randomly assigned to one of five training groups. Concentric load (% 1-RM) was constant across groups during training, but each group trained with different levels of eccentric load (0%, 33%, 66%, 100%, or 138% of concentric). Subjects trained 3 d / wk for 8 wks using a periodized program for LP and HR based on percentages of the highest pre-training 1-RM. LP and HR 1-RM and leg lean mass (LLM; assessed by DEXA) were measured pre- and post-training. A two-way ANOVA was used to analyze all dependent measures. Tukey's post hoc tests were used to test significant main effects. Within group pre- to post-training changes were compared using paired t-tests with a Bonferroni adjustment. Statistical significance was set a priori at p 0.05. All data are expressed as mean +/- SE. RESULTS: LP 1-RM strength increased significantly in all groups pre- to post-training. The 138% group increase (20.1 +/- 3.7%) was significantly greater than the 0% (7.9 +/- 2.8%), 33% (7.7 +/- 4.6%), and 66% (7.5 +/- 4.3%) groups. All groups significantly increased HR strength pre- to posttraining (33%: 7.5 +/- 6.1%; 66%: 6.6 +/- 3.7%; 100%: 12.2 +/- 1.8%; 138%: 11.0 +/- 6.4%) except for the 0% (4.9 +/- 9.1%) group. There were no differences between groups. LLM increased significantly pre- to post-training in only the 138% group; there were no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Eight wks of lower body resistive exercise training with eccentric overload resulted in greater increases in LP strength than training with eccentric loads of 66% or less. Post-training HR strength was not affected by eccentric training load, perhaps because of the predominance of Type I fibers typical in the gastrocnemius. Only 138% eccentric training significantly increased LLM. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: For athletes or others desiring to maximize muscle strength and hypertrophy gains, training with eccentric loads greater than 100% of concentric resistance will provide greater increases in muscle strength and lean tissue mass in some muscle groups. In a rehabilitation or geriatric exercise setting that places primary emphasis on program adherence and moderate strength gains, training with an eccentric underload may provide strength increases comparable to those of traditional 1:1 training but with less muscle soreness and physiologic insult to the patient, but this has yet to be proven.