Tschakert Gerhard, Kroepfl Julia M, Mueller Alexander, Harpf Hanns, Harpf Leonhard, Traninger Heimo, Wallner-Liebmann Sandra, Stojakovic Tatjana, Scharnagl Hubert, Meinitzer Andreas, Pichlhoefer Patriz, Hofmann Peter
Human Performance Research Graz; Institute of Sports Science, University of Graz, Max-Mell-Allee 11, Graz, Austria.
Human Performance Research Graz; Institute of Human Movement Sciences and Sport, ETH Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Sports Sci Med. 2016 Feb 23;15(1):80-91. eCollection 2016 Mar.
Despite described benefits of aerobic high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE), the acute responses during different HIIE modes and associated health risks have only been sparsely discovered in heart disease patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the acute responses for physiological parameters, cardiovascular and inflammatory biomarkers, and catecholamines yielded by two different aerobic HIIE protocols compared to continuous exercise (CE) in phase III cardiac rehabilitation. Eight cardiac patients (7 with coronary heart disease, 1 with myocarditis; 7 males, 1 female; age: 63.0 ± 9.4 years; height: 1.74 ± 0.05 m; weight: 83.6 ± 8.7 kg), all but one treated with ß-blocking agents, performed a maximal symptom-limited incremental exercise test (IET) and three different exercise tests matched for mean load (Pmean) and total duration: 1) short HIIE with a peak workload duration (tpeak) of 20 s and a peak workload (Ppeak) equal to the maximum power output (Pmax) from IET; 2) long HIIE with a tpeak of 4 min, Ppeak was corresponding to the power output at 85 % of maximal heart rate (HRmax) from IET; 3) CE with a target workload equal to Pmean of both HIIE modes. Acute metabolic and peak cardiorespiratory responses were significantly higher during long HIIE compared to short HIIE and CE (p < 0.05) except HRpeak which tended to be higher in long HIIE than in short HIIE (p = 0.08). Between short HIIE and CE, no significant difference was found for any parameter. Acute responses of cardiovascular and inflammatory biomarkers and catecholamines didn't show any significant difference between tests (p > 0.05). All health-related variables remained in a normal range in any test except NT-proBNP, which was already elevated at baseline. Despite a high Ppeak particularly in short HIIE, both HIIE modes were as safe and as well tolerated as moderate CE in cardiac patients by using our methodological approach. Key pointsHigh-intensity interval exercise (HIIE) with short peak workload durations (tpeak) induce a lower acute metabolic and peak cardiorespiratory response compared to intervals with long tpeak despite higher peak workload intensities and identical mean load. No significant difference for any physiological parameter was found between short HIIE and CE.Between short HIIE, long HIIE, and CE, no significant difference was found in the increase (or decrease, respectively,) of health related markers such as cardiovascular biomarkers, catecholamines, or inflammatory parameters during exercise.During all exercise modes, all risk markers remained in a normal range except for NT-proBNP which was, however, already elevated at baseline.Short HIIE, long HIIE, and CE were safely performed by patients with CHD or myocarditis in cardiac rehabilitation by using our methodological approach to exercise prescription. This approach included the prescription of exercise intensities with respect to LTP1, LTP2, and Pmax as well as a conscious setting of Pmean at a moderate level (80 % of PLTP2). Importantly, all exercise modes were matched for Pmean and exercise duration in order to enable a comparison of the three protocols.
尽管有氧高强度间歇运动(HIIE)有诸多益处,但在心脏病患者中,不同HIIE模式下的急性反应及相关健康风险却鲜有研究。因此,本研究旨在探究在心脏康复三期,与持续运动(CE)相比,两种不同的有氧HIIE方案对生理参数、心血管和炎症生物标志物以及儿茶酚胺的急性反应。八名心脏病患者(7例冠心病,1例心肌炎;7名男性,1名女性;年龄:63.0±9.4岁;身高:1.74±0.05米;体重:83.6±8.7千克),除1人外均接受β受体阻滞剂治疗,进行了一次症状限制的最大递增运动试验(IET)以及三项平均负荷(Pmean)和总时长匹配的不同运动试验:1)短HIIE,峰值工作量持续时间(tpeak)为20秒,峰值工作量(Ppeak)等于IET中的最大功率输出(Pmax);2)长HIIE,tpeak为4分钟,Ppeak对应于IET中最大心率(HRmax)85%时的功率输出;3)CE,目标工作量等于两种HIIE模式的Pmean。与短HIIE和CE相比,长HIIE期间的急性代谢和峰值心肺反应显著更高(p<0.05),但HRpeak在长HIIE中往往高于短HIIE(p = 0.08)。在短HIIE和CE之间,任何参数均未发现显著差异。心血管和炎症生物标志物以及儿茶酚胺的急性反应在各试验之间未显示出任何显著差异(p>0.05)。除NT-proBNP在基线时就已升高外,所有与健康相关的变量在任何试验中均保持在正常范围内。尽管尤其是短HIIE中的Ppeak较高,但通过我们采用固定方法,两种HIIE模式在心脏病患者中与中等强度的CE一样安全且耐受性良好。要点:尽管峰值工作量强度较高且平均负荷相同,但与tpeak长的间歇运动相比,峰值工作量持续时间(tpeak)短的高强度间歇运动(HIIE)引起的急性代谢和峰值心肺反应较低。短HIIE和CE之间未发现任何生理参数有显著差异。在短HIIE、长HIIE和CE之间,运动期间心血管生物标志物、儿茶酚胺或炎症参数等与健康相关指标的升高(或降低)未发现显著差异。在所有运动模式下,除NT-proBNP外,所有风险标志物均保持在正常范围内,而NT-proBNP在基线时就已升高。通过我们的运动处方固定方法,冠心病或心肌炎患者在心脏康复中安全地进行了短HIIE、长HIIE和CE。该方法包括根据LTP1、LTP2和Pmax规定运动强度,以及将Pmean有意识地设定在中等水平(PLTP2的80%)。重要的是,所有运动模式的Pmean和运动时长相匹配,以便能够比较这三种方案。