Unilateral eccentric resistance training : a direct comparison between isokinetic and dynamic constant external resistance modalities

Aim of the study was to compare the effects of unilateral eccentric-only training using constant velocity vs. constant external load. Forty-seven participants were randomized in isokinetic (IK), dynamic constant external resistance (DCER) unilateral eccentric training or control groups. Knee extension 1RM and isometric, eccentric and concentric knee extensors peak torque, as well as changes in vastus lateralis fascicle pennation angle, fascicle length, muscle thickness, and quadriceps fat-free mass were measured. Both IK and DCER training consisted in 5 × 8 eccentric-only repetitions, 2d/w, for 6 weeks. IK and DCER training sessions were matched for total volume. After training, both IK and DCER similarly increased 1RM (respectively, +4.4 kg, CI95% 1.8–7.0 and +5.5 kg, CI95% 3.3–7.9), isometric (respectively, +34.5 N/m, CI95% 23.0–45.9 and +15.8, CI95% 5.4–26.2) and concentric peak torque (respectively, +17.0 N/m, CI95% 6.6 to +27.4 and 12.2 CI95% 2.8–21.7). IK increased eccentric peak torque significantly more than DCER (respectively, +84.2 N/m, CI95% 66.3–102.1 and +38.2 N/m, CI95% 21.9–54.4). Both IK and DCER similarly increased fascicle length (respectively, +14.7 mm, CI95% 5.4–24.0 and +14.4 mm, CI95% 5.4–23.3) and muscle thickness (respectively, +3.3 mm, CI95% 1.5–5.1, and +4.1 mm, CI95% 2.5–5.7). Matching the training volume resulted in similar adaptations comparing eccentric-only IK or DCER resistance training. Both in rehabilitation and in training practice, the use of easily available gym devices can be a good substitute for expensive and often unavailable IK devices.