Key result
Both continuous and interval aerobic training improved cardiac function and remodeling in CHF rats compared to sedentary controls, with interval training being superior for maximal exercise capacity.
Why the study?
Does aerobic continuous or interval training improve hemodynamics, cardiac remodeling, and exercise capacity in rats with chronic heart failure?
Does aerobic continuous or interval training improve hemodynamics, cardiac remodeling, and exercise capacity in rats with chronic heart failure?
Should not change practice in CHF; leaves open translation of interval training benefits from rat models.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of continuous versus interval aerobic exercise training on hemodynamic parameters, cardiac remodeling, and maximal exercise capacity (MEC) in chronic heart failure (CHF) rats. METHOD: Twenty-four male Wistar rats were subjected to myocardial infarction (MI) surgery. Five weeks post MI, the animals were assigned to one of three groups: sedentary group (CHF-Sed, n=8), aerobic continuous training group (CHF-ACT, n=8), and aerobic interval training group (CHF-AIT, n=8). Treadmill training was performed five times a week for 8 weeks (ACT: 50 min/day at 15 m/min and AIT: 40 min/day with 8 min of warm-up at 10 m/min and exercise at 15 m/min 4×4 min interspersed with 4×4 min at 23 m/min). MEC was evaluated pre and post exercise program. RESULTS: Left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP), left ventricular mass/body mass ratio (LVM:BM), and total collagen volume fraction were lower in the trained groups compared with the sedentary group, but no difference was found between the trained groups. Systolic ventricular pressure (SVP) and maximum positive derivative of LV pressure (+dP/dtmax) were higher in the trained groups, but CHF-ACT showed higher +dP/dt(max) compared to CHF-AIT. Both training regimens were able to increase MEC. However, the aerobic interval training was superior for improving MEC. CONCLUSION: Aerobic training is an important intervention to improve cardiac function and remodeling and physical capacity in CHF rats. Interval training is a potential strategy to maximize the results, but exercise type and intensity are still topics to be explored.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nunes et al. (2015) studied Chronic heart failure (CHF) (n=24). Aerobic continuous training and aerobic interval training vs. Sedentary group was evaluated on Hemodynamic parameters, cardiac remodeling, and maximal exercise capacity (MEC). Both continuous and interval aerobic training improved cardiac function and remodeling in CHF rats compared to sedentary controls, with interval training being superior for maximal exercise capacity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: