Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 2021
High-Intensity Interval Training in Patients with Pulmonary Embolism: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ghram Amine, Jenab Yaser, Soori Rahman, Choobineh Siroos, Hosseinsabet Ali, Niyazi Sepideh, Shirani Shapoor, Shafiee Akbar, Jalali Arash, Lavie Carl J, Wisløff Ulrik
Аннотация
PURPOSE: High-intensity interval training (HIIT) appears to be safe and effective in cardiovascular diseases. However, there is a paucity of data on the effect of HIIT for patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The present randomized controlled trial (RCT) therefore examined the efficiency and safety of HIIT in patients with acute PE.
METHODS: In single-center parallel open-label RCT, 24 patients (5 women) discharged recently with a diagnosis of intermediate-high-risk acute PE were randomized (1:1) to supervised HIIT (n = 12) or control (n = 12) group. The primary outcomes were exercise capacity evaluated in terms of the estimated maximal oxygen uptake (eV˙O2max), lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]), right ventricular (RV) function (RV/left ventricular diameter [LV] ratio), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Safety was the secondary outcome.
RESULTS: Eight weeks of HIIT improved eV˙O2max (+65%, P < 0.001), FEV1 (%) (+17%, P = 0.031), and RV/LV ratio diameter (-27%, P = 0.005), as well as HRQoL. All patients in the HIIT group tolerated exercise training without serious adverse events. The control group did not improve (P > 0.05) eV˙O2max, RV/LV ratio diameter, or HRQoL; however, FEV1 (%) was slightly reduced (-6%, P = 0.030).
CONCLUSIONS: The present RCT of a tailored center-based HIIT intervention provides preliminary evidence that this intervention could improve exercise capacity, lung function, RV function, and HRQoL without serious adverse events, which could provide marked clinical benefits after PE. Further larger multicenter randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these promising findings.
METHODS: In single-center parallel open-label RCT, 24 patients (5 women) discharged recently with a diagnosis of intermediate-high-risk acute PE were randomized (1:1) to supervised HIIT (n = 12) or control (n = 12) group. The primary outcomes were exercise capacity evaluated in terms of the estimated maximal oxygen uptake (eV˙O2max), lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]), right ventricular (RV) function (RV/left ventricular diameter [LV] ratio), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Safety was the secondary outcome.
RESULTS: Eight weeks of HIIT improved eV˙O2max (+65%, P < 0.001), FEV1 (%) (+17%, P = 0.031), and RV/LV ratio diameter (-27%, P = 0.005), as well as HRQoL. All patients in the HIIT group tolerated exercise training without serious adverse events. The control group did not improve (P > 0.05) eV˙O2max, RV/LV ratio diameter, or HRQoL; however, FEV1 (%) was slightly reduced (-6%, P = 0.030).
CONCLUSIONS: The present RCT of a tailored center-based HIIT intervention provides preliminary evidence that this intervention could improve exercise capacity, lung function, RV function, and HRQoL without serious adverse events, which could provide marked clinical benefits after PE. Further larger multicenter randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these promising findings.