Impact of eccentric cycling in coronary rehabilitation program: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial versus conventional rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND

This randomized controlled trial examined the feasibility of adding eccentric exercise to a conventional cardiac rehabilitation program (CCRP) for coronary heart disease patients.

METHODS

Ninety-three patients were randomly assigned to either the MIX group (eccentric ergometer + CCRP) or the CON group (concentric ergometer + CCRP) for 7 weeks. Training effectiveness was assessed based on "good responders" showing improved functional capacities, such as 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance and maximal voluntary contraction of the plantar flexors (ankle MVC). Safety was monitored with a visual analog scale for muscle soreness, perceived exertion, and heart rate during training.

RESULTS

The proportion of good responders was similar between groups (26% in MIX, 29% in CON, P=0.744). Both groups improved in 6MWT (CON: 12.6%, MIX: 16.14%) and ankle MVC (CON: 15.5%, MIX: 11.30%), with no significant differences. Exercise tolerance did not differ significantly between the groups, but perceived effort was significantly lower in the MIX group (P<0.0001) compared to the CON group.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrating eccentric exercise into cardiac rehabilitation is safe and well-tolerated. Nevertheless, this study did not find significant advantages over conventional programs for coronary heart disease patients. Further research should explore specific patient groups or conditions where eccentric exercise may be more beneficial, emphasizing personalized prescriptions and gradual workload progression for better cardiac rehabilitation outcomes.