Why the study?
Short sessions of isometric exercise reduce blood pressure in normotensive and hypertensive subjects, but few data exist in hypertensive patients with underlying ischemic heart disease.
Does an isometric exercise session reduce blood pressure compared to combined exercise or no exercise in hypertensive patients with ischemic heart disease?
Does an isometric exercise session reduce blood pressure compared to combined exercise or no exercise in hypertensive patients with ischemic heart disease?
Combined exercise is more effective than short isometric exercise in reducing systolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients with ischemic heart disease, although both modalities induce post-exercise hypotension.
CES produces greater SBP reduction than IES in hypertensive IHD patients; extends post-exercise hypotension evidence to this high-risk group.
Background: Short sessions of isometric exercise have been shown to reduce blood pressure (BP) in normotensive and hypertensive subjects. However, there are few data in hypertensive patients with underlying ischemic heart disease (IHD). In the present study, we compared post-exercise hypotension (PEH) induced by isometric versus combined, aerobic plus dynamic resistance exercise in IHD patients. Methods: Twenty-five stable patients with established IHD and with treated hypertension were enrolled. The study had a cross-over design. All patients performed in a random order and on different days: (1) isometric exercise session (IES) consisting of bilateral knee extension, performed at 20% of maximal voluntary contraction and lasting 20 min; (2) combined exercise session (CES) including moderate-intensity continuous exercise at and dynamic resistance exercise performed at 60% of one repetition maximum, and lasting 60 min and (3) control session (no exercise). BP was measured at rest, immediately after the training and then every 15 min up to 90 min. Results: The repeated measures ANOVA analysis showed that systolic BP significantly decreased after the CES session compared to the control (F = 6.2; p 0.001) and IES (F = 4.4; p 0.004). Systolic BP significantly decreased after IES compared to the control (F = 3.6; p 0.036). Diastolic BP did not show significant changes after CES and IES compared to the control (CES vs. control: F = 2.2; p 0.142; IES vs. control (F = 2.5; p 0.062). There were no significant differences in diastolic BP changes between CES and IES (CES vs. IES: F = 1.8; p 0.156). Conclusions: We observed that CES was more effective than IES in reducing systolic BP; IES was as effective as CES in inducing diastolic PEH in hypertensive patients with underlying IHD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laterza et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: