Key result
Planned trial tests blood flow restriction resistance training against conventional training for NT-proBNP in heart failure.
Why the study?
Innovative cardiopulmonary rehabilitation strategies are needed to improve accessibility and effectiveness for heart failure patients unable to tolerate high hemodynamic loads.
Does low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction improve NT-proBNP levels compared to conventional resistance training in patients with heart failure?
RCT (n=52)
Open-label
Permuted block design (block size of 2)
No
Does low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction improve NT-proBNP levels compared to conventional resistance training in patients with heart failure?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This trial protocol aims to evaluate whether low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction can serve as an effective and accessible rehabilitation strategy for heart failure patients unable to tolerate high hemodynamic loads.
Background Heart failure (HF) significantly reduces functional capacity and quality of life in patients classified as New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II–III. While cardiopulmonary rehabilitation (CR) is beneficial, innovative strategies are required to improve accessibility and effectiveness for individuals unable to tolerate high hemodynamic loads. Aims To compare the effects of conventional moderate-to-high intensity resistance training (CRT) versus low-load resistance training combined with blood flow restriction (BFRRT) on clinical, functional, and biochemical outcomes in HF patients. Methods and analysis This randomized, prospective, parallel-group clinical trial will include 52 patients (NYHA II–III) allocated into CRT (60–80% 1RM) or BFRRT (20–30% 1RM, calibrated at 50% arterial occlusion pressure) groups. The supervised intervention lasts 4 months, with an 8-month post-intervention follow-up. The primary outcome is the change in serum NT-proBNP levels. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, echocardiographic ventricular function, functional capacity, and clinical events. Advanced statistical models and exploratory machine learning analyses with k-fold cross-validation will be utilized for predictive modeling and exploring personalized medicine strategies. Implications The REHAB-WASHOUT HF trial aims to establish an effective, safe, and accessible therapeutic approach for HF rehabilitation, potentially enhancing clinical outcomes and guiding personalized prescriptive strategies in cardiovascular rehabilitation. Ethics and registration Approved by the local institutional review board (No. 5.848.965; CAAE 64955022.9.1001.0029). Trial registration: RBR-5y8k7d7.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silva et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (HFrEF or HFpEF) (n=52). Blood flow restriction resistance training (BFRRT) vs. Conventional resistance training (CRT) at 60-80% 1RM was evaluated on Longitudinal change in serum N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels from baseline to 16 weeks. Blood flow restriction resistance training will be compared to conventional resistance training to evaluate changes in NT-proBNP levels in a planned trial of 52 patients with heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: