Key result
High-intensity interval training was safe, feasible, and improved exercise capacity by a mean difference of 134.2 seconds and peripheral insulin sensitivity compared to a sham-exercise control in patients with NASH.
Why the study?
HIIT may benefit cardiometabolic health in people with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, but its safety, feasibility, and efficacy needed examination.
Does 12 weeks of supervised HIIT improve exercise capacity and peripheral insulin sensitivity in patients with biopsy-proven NASH compared to sham-exercise control?
RCT (n=14)
Single-blind
1:1 permuted blocks
No
Does 12 weeks of supervised HIIT improve exercise capacity and peripheral insulin sensitivity in patients with biopsy-proven NASH compared to sham-exercise control?
Mean Difference: 134.2 (95% CI 19.8–248.6)
Absolute Event Rate: 106.2% vs -33.4%
p-value: p=0.03
A 12-week supervised HIIT program is safe, feasible, and improves exercise capacity and peripheral insulin sensitivity in patients with NASH.
Supports HIIT to improve exercise capacity and insulin sensitivity in NASH; extends limited RCT evidence on exercise interventions.
High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) involves bursts of high-intensity exercise interspersed with lower-intensity exercise recovery. HIIT may benefit cardiometabolic health in people with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We aimed to examine the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of 12-weeks of supervised HIIT compared with a sham-exercise control (CON) for improving aerobic fitness and peripheral insulin sensitivity in biopsy-proven NASH. Participants based in the community [(n = 14, 56 ± 10 years, BMI 39.2 ± 6.7 kg/m2, 64% male), NAFLD Activity Score 5 (range 3–7)] were randomized to 12-weeks of supervised HIIT (n = 8, 4 × 4 min at 85–95% maximal heart rate, interspersed with 3 min active recovery; 3 days/week) or CON (n = 6, stretching; 3 days/week). Safety (adverse events) and feasibility determined as ≥ 70% program completion and ≥ 70% global adherence (including session attendance, interval intensity adherence, and duration adherence) were assessed. Changes in cardiorespiratory fitness (V̇O2peak), exercise capacity (time-on-test) and peripheral insulin sensitivity (euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp) were assessed. Data were analysed using ANCOVA with baseline value as the covariate. There were no HIIT-related adverse events and HIIT was globally feasible [program completion 75%, global adherence 100% (including adherence to session 95.4 ± 7.3%, interval intensity 95.3 ± 6.0% and duration 96.8 ± 2.4%)]. A large between-group effect was observed for exercise capacity [mean difference 134.2 s (95% CI 19.8, 248.6 s), ƞ2 0.44, p = 0.03], improving in HIIT (106.2 ± 97.5 s) but not CON (− 33.4 ± 43.3 s), and for peripheral insulin sensitivity [mean difference 3.4 mg/KgLegFFM/min (95% CI 0.9,6.8 mg/KgLegFFM/min), ƞ2 0.32, p = 0.046], improving in HIIT (1.0 ± 0.8 mg/KgLegFFM/min) but not CON (− 3.1 ± 1.2 mg/KgLegFFM/min). HIIT is safe, feasible and efficacious for improving exercise capacity and peripheral insulin sensitivity in people with NASH. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (anzctr.org.au) identifier ACTRN12616000305426 (09/03/2016).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Keating et al. (2022) conducted an RCT in Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) (n=14). High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) vs. Sham-exercise control (stretching) was evaluated on Exercise capacity (time-on-test) (MD 134.2 s, 95% CI 19.8, 248.6, p=0.03). High-intensity interval training was safe, feasible, and improved exercise capacity by a mean difference of 134.2 seconds and peripheral insulin sensitivity compared to a sham-exercise control in patients with NASH.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: