Key result
Vigorous continuous training yields ~8% higher VO2 than HIIT, driven by greater arteriovenous oxygen difference.
Why the study?
How do cardiac output, stroke volume, and oxygen uptake respond to duration-matched sessions of HIIT, MICT, and VICT in healthy active men?
RCT (n=18)
Open-label
Randomized crossover
No
How do cardiac output, stroke volume, and oxygen uptake respond to duration-matched sessions of HIIT, MICT, and VICT in healthy active men?
Standardized Mean Difference: 0.69
Absolute Event Rate: 2.43% vs 2.25%
p-value: p=0.016
Vigorous intensity continuous training elicits higher mean oxygen uptake and similar cardiac output compared to high intensity interval training, providing a substantial cardiovascular stimulus.
VICT elicits similar CO to HIIT with higher VO2 via avO2diff; leaves open optimal regimens for cardiorespiratory adaptations in active adults.
Introduction: Cardiac output (CO), the product of heart rate and stroke volume (SV), reflects oxygen transport to skeletal muscle during exercise and is a determinant of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). This study assessed differences in the CO and SV response to three duration-matched sessions of cycling. Methods: Eighteen healthy non-obese men (age and VO2max = 24 ± 5 yr and 41 ± 9 mL/kg/min) initially completed incremental cycling to exhaustion to determine VO2max, maximal CO and SV, and first ventilatory threshold (VT1). Subsequent sessions included 15 min of high intensity interval training (HIIT) at workload equal to 30% above VT1, moderate intensity continuous training (MICT) at 30% below VT1, and vigorous intensity continuous training (VICT) at 10% below VT1. Pulmonary gas exchange data and thoracic impedance were used to assess changes in VO2, SV, arterio-venous oxygen difference (avO2diff), and CO during exercise. Results: Results revealed significantly higher mean VO2 in response to VICT versus HIIT (2.43 ± 0.52 vs. 2.25 ± 0.39 L/min, p = 0.016, d = 0.69) which was associated with a significantly higher (p = 0.01) avO2diff (12.4 ± 2.0 vs. 11.4 ± 1.6 mL/dL, d = 0.37), yet CO was similar (p > 0.05) between VICT and HIIT. Stroke volume was not different across protocols (p = 0.08) and displayed varied responses across participants. Conclusions: Despitelower intensity than HIIT, VICT elicited significantly higher mean VO2 and similar CO compared to HIIT, suggesting a substantial stimulus on the cardiovascular system during exercise.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Astorino et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Healthy active men (n=18). Vigorous intensity continuous training (VICT) vs. High intensity interval training (HIIT) was evaluated on Mean oxygen consumption (VO2) (d = 0.69, p=0.016). Vigorous intensity continuous training elicited significantly higher mean VO2 compared to high intensity interval training (2.43 vs. 2.25 L/min) in active men, driven by higher arteriovenous oxygen difference.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: