Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
March 3, 2025European Journal of Preventive Cardiology

Both MICT and HIIT resulted in a similar improvement in global longitudinal strain (HIIT: -0.82%, 95% CI: -0.19/-61; MICT: -1.11%, 95% CI: -1.17/-0.51; time ∗ group P = 0.71).

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

The study aimed to compare the effects of moderate-intensity continuous training versus isovolumic high-intensity interval training on left ventricular myocardial function early post-acute myocardial infarction.

Does isovolumic high-intensity interval training improve left ventricular myocardial function compared to moderate-intensity continuous training in patients early after acute myocardial infarction?

Comparison

MICT vs isovolumic HIIT

Design

Randomized controlled trial

Follow-up

8-week training programme

Authors

POPhilippe ObertSNStéphane NottinCBClarisse Belvisi

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Either MICT or HIIT may be used early post-MI; confirms comparable GLS benefits in supervised rehabilitation.

Structured PICO

Does isovolumic high-intensity interval training improve left ventricular myocardial function compared to moderate-intensity continuous training in patients early after acute myocardial infarction?

P
Population
100 patients early after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), starting within 6 weeks post-AMI
I
Intervention
8-week training programme comprising isovolumic high-intensity interval training (HIIT)
C
Comparator
8-week training programme comprising moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT)
O
Outcome
Left ventricular (LV) myocardial function, including measurements of LV longitudinal strain (LS), circumferential strain, torsional mechanics, LV myocardial work (MW), mechanical dispersion indexes, and atrial strains after 8 weeks of cardiac rehabilitationsurrogate

Early supervised exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation, using either moderate-intensity continuous training or isovolumic high-intensity interval training, similarly improves longitudinal myocardial function after acute myocardial infarction.

Cite This Study

Obert et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7eb85f92a53ed74d8ba0bchttps://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwaf127
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Short- and Long-Term Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training vs. Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on Left Ventricular Remodeling in Patients Early After ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction—The HIIT-EARLY Randomized Controlled Trial2022 · 21 citations
  2. 2Effects of high-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training on cardiorespiratory and exercise capacity in patients with coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis2025 · 22 citations
  3. 3Abstract MPTH64: High-Intensity Interval Training Provides Greater Gains In Quality of Life Than Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training in Post-Myocardial Infarction Patients: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials2026
  4. 4Comparison of different aerobic exercise modalities on echocardiographic variables in early cardiac rehabilitation2026
  5. 5Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training vs Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training on Body Composition and Blood Biomarkers in Coronary Artery Disease Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial2024 · 11 citations