Cited by 81Muscle metabolism and nutritionExercise and Physiological ResponsesCardiovascular and exercise physiology

Branched-chain amino acid supplementation and exercise-induced muscle damage in exercise recovery: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Rahimi, Mohammad Hossein, Shab-Bidar, Sakineh, Mollahosseini, Mehdi, Djafarian, Kurosh·2017·Nutrition

Abstract

Objective Accumulating evidence suggests positive effects of branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) on moderate muscle damage. However, findings vary substantially across studies. The aim of this review was to examine the effect of BCAAs on recovery following exercise-induced muscle damage.Methods Controlled trials were identified through a computerized literature search and tracking of citations performed up to November 2015. To pool data, either a fixed-effects or a random-effects model was used; for assessing heterogeneity, Cochran's Q and I 2 tests were used.Results Eight trials met the inclusion criteria. Pooled data from the eight studies showed that BCAAs significantly reduced creatine kinase at two follow-up times (<24 and 24 h) in comparison with placebo recovery (<24 h: mean difference, -71.55 U/L, 95% confidence interval, -93.49 to -49.60, P < 0.000, n = 5 trials; 24 h: mean difference, -145.04 U/L, 95% confidence interval, -253.66 to -36.43, P = 0.009, n = 8 trials). In contrast, effects were not significant in any of the follow-up times for muscle soreness or lactate dehydrogenase.Conclusion The current evidence-based information indicates that use of BCAAs is better than passive recovery or rest after various forms of exhaustive and damaging exercise. The advantages relate to a reduction in muscle soreness and ameliorated muscle function because of an attenuation of muscle strength and muscle power loss after exercise.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nut.2017.05.005

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rahimi, M. H., Shab-Bidar, S., Mollahosseini, M., & Djafarian, K.
Affiliations
Tehran University of Medical Sciences (IR)
Corresponding author
Djafarian, Kurosh
Venue
Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-10
Volume
42
Pages
30-36
ISSN
0899-9007 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2614747718
Cited by
81
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2018-03-01)
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Exercise and Physiological Responses
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
branched-chain amino acids, exercise-induced muscle damage, post-exercise recovery, creatine kinase, muscle soreness, lactate dehydrogenase, muscle strength, muscle power, post-exercise supplementation
MeSH terms
Amino Acids, Branched-Chain, Humans, L-Lactate Dehydrogenase, Exercise, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Muscle, Skeletal, Dietary Supplements, Myalgia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review