High-Intensity Interval Training in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction
-
Published:2017-02-28
Issue:9
Volume:135
Page:839-849
-
ISSN:0009-7322
-
Container-title:Circulation
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Circulation
Author:
Ellingsen Øyvind1, Halle Martin1, Conraads Viviane1, Støylen Asbjørn1, Dalen Håvard1, Delagardelle Charles1, Larsen Alf-Inge1, Hole Torstein1, Mezzani Alessandro1, Van Craenenbroeck Emeline M.1, Videm Vibeke1, Beckers Paul1, Christle Jeffrey W.1, Winzer Ephraim1, Mangner Norman1, Woitek Felix1, Höllriegel Robert1, Pressler Axel1, Monk-Hansen Tea1, Snoer Martin1, Feiereisen Patrick1, Valborgland Torstein1, Kjekshus John1, Hambrecht Rainer1, Gielen Stephan1, Karlsen Trine1, Prescott Eva1, Linke Axel1
Affiliation:
1. From St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Norway (Ø.E., A.S., H.D., V.V., T.K.); K.G. Jebsen Center for Exercise in Medicine, Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway (Ø.E., H.D., T.K.); Department of Prevention, Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine, Technische Universität München, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Germany (M.H., J.W.C., A.P.); DZHK (German Center for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Munich Heart...
Abstract
Background:
Small studies have suggested that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior to moderate continuous training (MCT) in reversing cardiac remodeling and increasing aerobic capacity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The present multicenter trial compared 12 weeks of supervised interventions of HIIT, MCT, or a recommendation of regular exercise (RRE).
Methods:
Two hundred sixty-one patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and New York Heart Association class II to III were randomly assigned to HIIT at 90% to 95% of maximal heart rate, MCT at 60% to 70% of maximal heart rate, or RRE. Thereafter, patients were encouraged to continue exercising on their own. Clinical assessments were performed at baseline, after the intervention, and at follow-up after 52 weeks. Primary end point was a between-group comparison of change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks.
Results:
Groups did not differ in age (median, 60 years), sex (19% women), ischemic pathogenesis (59%), or medication. Change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks was not different between HIIT and MCT (
P
=0.45); left ventricular end-diastolic diameter changes compared with RRE were −2.8 mm (−5.2 to −0.4 mm;
P
=0.02) in HIIT and −1.2 mm (−3.6 to 1.2 mm;
P
=0.34) in MCT. There was also no difference between HIIT and MCT in peak oxygen uptake (
P
=0.70), but both were superior to RRE. However, none of these changes was maintained at follow-up after 52 weeks. Serious adverse events were not statistically different during supervised intervention or at follow-up at 52 weeks (HIIT, 39%; MCT, 25%; RRE, 34%;
P
=0.16). Training records showed that 51% of patients exercised below prescribed target during supervised HIIT and 80% above target in MCT.
Conclusions:
HIIT was not superior to MCT in changing left ventricular remodeling or aerobic capacity, and its feasibility remains unresolved in patients with heart failure.
Clinical Trial Registration:
URL:
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov
. Unique identifier: NCT00917046.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Subject
Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Cited by
307 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|