Key result
Combined training reduces PWV vs control in high-risk patients, ranking as the most effective exercise.
Why the study?
Although exercise improves arterial stiffness, it remains unclear which type of exercise is most effective in individuals at high risk for cardiovascular diseases.
Do different exercise interventions (interval, aerobic, resistance, or combined training) improve arterial stiffness and blood pressure in individuals at high risk for cardiovascular disease?
Meta-Analysis (n=2,034)
Do different exercise interventions (interval, aerobic, resistance, or combined training) improve arterial stiffness and blood pressure in individuals at high risk for cardiovascular disease?
Effect estimate: SMD -0.69 (95% CI -1.17 to -0.21)
p-value: p=<0.0001
In individuals at high risk for cardiovascular disease, combined training is the most effective exercise modality for improving arterial stiffness, while interval training is most effective for lowering systolic blood pressure.
Supports prioritizing combined training to reduce arterial stiffness in high-risk patients; extends comparative evidence on exercise modalities.
Background: Previous studies have shown that exercise can improve arterial stiffness (AS). However, it remains unclear which type of exercise is most effective for managing AS, particularly in individuals at high risk for cardiovascular diseases (CVD). This review aims to evaluate the effects of various exercises on AS and related variables in individuals at high risk for CVD. Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was employed to systematically explore MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Library, EBSCOhost, and Web of Science to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized controlled trials; (2) participants with known CVD risk factors as per the American College of Sports Medicine guidelines; (3) interventions including interval training (INT), aerobic exercise (AE), resistance exercise, and combined exercise (CT); (4) control groups engaging in no intervention, routine care, or health education; (5) outcome measures of pulse wave velocity (PWV), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure; and (6) studies published in English. Studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and analyzed with a random-effects network meta-analysis. Results: = 43%) significantly reduced SBP. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) showed that CT (SUCRA = 87.2) was the most effective for lowering PWV, while INT (SUCRA = 81.3) was the most effective for lowering SBP. Conclusion: In high-risk populations for CVD, CT was most effective in improving AS, while INT demonstrated the greatest reduction in SBP. AE showed greater benefits at moderate to low intensities. Due to significant heterogeneity in CT, its results should be interpreted with caution. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to confirm these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2025) conducted a meta-analysis in High risk for cardiovascular disease (n=2,034). Combined training vs. No intervention, routine care, or health education was evaluated on Pulse wave velocity (PWV) (SMD -0.69, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.21, p=<0.0001). Combined training significantly reduced pulse wave velocity (SMD -0.69) compared to control in individuals at high risk for cardiovascular disease, ranking as the most effective exercise intervention.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: