Cargando…

High-intensity interval training improves metabolic syndrome and body composition in outpatient cardiac rehabilitation patients with myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND: To examine the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on metabolic syndrome (MetS) and body composition in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) patients with myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: We retrospectively screened 174 consecutive patients with MetS enrolled in CR following MI...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dun, Yaoshan, Thomas, Randal J., Smith, Joshua R., Medina-Inojosa, Jose R., Squires, Ray W., Bonikowske, Amanda R., Huang, Hsuhang, Liu, Suixin, Olson, Thomas P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6694483/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31412869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12933-019-0907-0
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To examine the effect of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on metabolic syndrome (MetS) and body composition in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) patients with myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: We retrospectively screened 174 consecutive patients with MetS enrolled in CR following MI between 2015 and 2018. We included 56 patients who completed 36 CR sessions and pre-post dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Of these patients, 42 engaged in HIIT and 14 in moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). HIIT included 4–8 intervals of high-intensity (30–60 s at RPE 15–17 [Borg 6–20]) and low-intensity (1–5 min at RPE < 14), and MICT included 20–45 min of exercise at RPE 12–14. MetS and body composition variables were compared between MICT and HIIT groups. RESULTS: Compared to MICT, HIIT demonstrated greater reductions in MetS (relative risk = 0.5, 95% CI 0.33–0.75, P < .001), MetS z-score (− 3.6 ± 2.9 vs. − 0.8 ± 3.8, P < .001) and improved MetS components: waist circumference (− 3 ± 5 vs. 1 ± 5 cm, P = .01), fasting blood glucose (− 25.8 ± 34.8 vs. − 3.9 ± 25.8 mg/dl, P < .001), triglycerides (− 67.8 ± 86.7 vs. − 10.4 ± 105.3 mg/dl, P < .001), and diastolic blood pressure (− 7 ± 11 vs. 0 ± 13 mmHg, P = .001). HIIT group demonstrated greater reductions in body fat mass (− 2.1 ± 2.1 vs. 0 ± 2.2 kg, P = .002), with increased body lean mass (0.9 ± 1.9 vs. − 0.9 ± 3.2 kg, P = .01) than the MICT. After matching for exercise energy expenditure, HIIT-induced improvements persisted for MetS z-score (P < .001), MetS components (P < .05), body fat mass (P = .002), body fat (P = .01), and lean mass (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that, compared to MICT, supervised HIIT results in greater improvements in MetS and body composition in MI patients with MetS undergoing CR.