High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart Failure Reviews Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1007/s10741-023-10316-3
Masatsugu Okamura, Masashi Shimizu, Shuhei Yamamoto, Kenichi Nishie, Masaaki Konishi
{"title":"High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Masatsugu Okamura,&nbsp;Masashi Shimizu,&nbsp;Shuhei Yamamoto,&nbsp;Kenichi Nishie,&nbsp;Masaaki Konishi","doi":"10.1007/s10741-023-10316-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in patients with heart failure (HF) remain controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the efficacy of HIIT versus moderate-intensity continuous aerobic training (MCT) on exercise tolerance in patients with HF. We searched for studies published up to 4 March 2022 in Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library with no limitations on data, language, or publication status. We included randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of HIIT and MCT on peak oxygen uptake (VO<sub>2</sub>), as a measure of exercise tolerance. We pooled the data on peak VO<sub>2</sub>, compared HIIT to MCT, and conducted a sub-analysis if there was heterogeneity in the result. We identified 15 randomized controlled trials with 557 patients. Our meta-analysis showed that participants who underwent HIIT achieved a significantly higher peak VO<sub>2</sub> than those who underwent MCT (mean difference 1.46 ml/kg/min, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 2.53; participants = 557; studies = 15; I<sup>2</sup> = 65.7%; very low-quality evidence). The meta-regression analysis, conducted as a sub-analysis to explore possible causes of heterogeneity, revealed that the difference in peak VO<sub>2</sub> between HIIT and MCT was inversely associated with body mass index (r =  - 0.508, p = 0.028, 95% confidence interval - 0.95 to - 0.07). Our systematic review showed that HIIT achieved a higher peak VO<sub>2</sub> than MCT in patients with HF. In addition, HIIT may be more effective in improving exercise tolerance in patients with low body mass index.</p>","PeriodicalId":12950,"journal":{"name":"Heart Failure Reviews","volume":"28 5","pages":"1113-1128"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Failure Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-023-10316-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The effects of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) in patients with heart failure (HF) remain controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the efficacy of HIIT versus moderate-intensity continuous aerobic training (MCT) on exercise tolerance in patients with HF. We searched for studies published up to 4 March 2022 in Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library with no limitations on data, language, or publication status. We included randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of HIIT and MCT on peak oxygen uptake (VO2), as a measure of exercise tolerance. We pooled the data on peak VO2, compared HIIT to MCT, and conducted a sub-analysis if there was heterogeneity in the result. We identified 15 randomized controlled trials with 557 patients. Our meta-analysis showed that participants who underwent HIIT achieved a significantly higher peak VO2 than those who underwent MCT (mean difference 1.46 ml/kg/min, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 2.53; participants = 557; studies = 15; I2 = 65.7%; very low-quality evidence). The meta-regression analysis, conducted as a sub-analysis to explore possible causes of heterogeneity, revealed that the difference in peak VO2 between HIIT and MCT was inversely associated with body mass index (r =  - 0.508, p = 0.028, 95% confidence interval - 0.95 to - 0.07). Our systematic review showed that HIIT achieved a higher peak VO2 than MCT in patients with HF. In addition, HIIT may be more effective in improving exercise tolerance in patients with low body mass index.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心力衰竭患者的高强度间歇训练与中等强度连续训练:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
高强度间歇训练(HIIT)对心力衰竭(HF)患者的影响仍然存在争议。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在研究HIIT与中强度持续有氧训练(MCT)对心衰患者运动耐量的影响。我们检索了截至2022年3月4日在Embase、MEDLINE、PubMed和Cochrane图书馆发表的研究,没有数据、语言或出版状态的限制。我们纳入了比较HIIT和MCT对峰值摄氧量(VO2)的功效的随机对照试验,VO2是运动耐量的衡量标准。我们汇总了峰值VO2的数据,比较了HIIT和MCT,并对结果是否存在异质性进行了亚分析。我们确定了15个随机对照试验,557例患者。我们的荟萃分析显示,接受HIIT的参与者的峰值VO2显著高于接受MCT的参与者(平均差异1.46 ml/kg/min, 95%可信区间0.39至2.53;参与者= 557人;研究数= 15;i2 = 65.7%;非常低质量的证据)。meta回归分析作为一项亚分析来探索异质性的可能原因,结果显示HIIT和MCT之间的峰值VO2差异与体重指数呈负相关(r = - 0.508, p = 0.028, 95%可信区间为- 0.95至- 0.07)。我们的系统综述显示,在HF患者中,HIIT比MCT达到更高的峰值VO2。此外,HIIT可能更有效地改善低体重指数患者的运动耐受性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
相关文献
Books Received 2002
IF 1.5 1区 哲学SynthesePub Date : 2003-08-31 DOI: 10.1023/A:1021244326161
Steve, T. Kuhn, K. Ansell
2002: Books Received
IF 0 MLN bulletinPub Date : 2003-02-14 DOI: 10.1353/mln.2003.0001
R. Macksey, D. Deluna, Heather Dubnick, B. Earle, William Egginton, G. Fisch, Oleg Gelikman, Rodolphe Gasché, S. Geroulanos, Josh Lukin, Anne Mairesse, Frank E. Moorer, R. Nägele, Beryl Schlossman, H. Sussman, L. Tønder
Books Received 2002
IF 0 Journal of Protein ChemistryPub Date : 2003-08-01 DOI: 10.1076/enst.84.4.396.17387
R. Mitchell
来源期刊
Heart Failure Reviews
Heart Failure Reviews 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
2.20%
发文量
90
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart Failure Reviews is an international journal which develops links between basic scientists and clinical investigators, creating a unique, interdisciplinary dialogue focused on heart failure, its pathogenesis and treatment. The journal accordingly publishes papers in both basic and clinical research fields. Topics covered include clinical and surgical approaches to therapy, basic pharmacology, biochemistry, molecular biology, pathology, and electrophysiology. The reviews are comprehensive, expanding the reader''s knowledge base and awareness of current research and new findings in this rapidly growing field of cardiovascular medicine. All reviews are thoroughly peer-reviewed before publication.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Worsening heart failure: progress, pitfalls, and perspectives. Electronic health record nudges to optimize guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure. Heart and brain interactions in heart failure: pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical perspectives. Leptin and heart failure: the chicken or the egg? Mechanisms of exercise intolerance in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1