Comparison of Acute Hemodynamic Response to One-Set of Resistance Exercise With Low-Load to Concentric Failure and High-Load Resistance Exercise in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A RANDOMIZED CROSSOVER TRIAL.

IF 2.9 3区医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention Pub Date : 2026-06-09 DOI:10.1097/HCR.0000000000001034

Adel Ghorbani, Payam Saidie, Tolou Hasandokht, Seyed Mohammad Taghi Razavi Tousi, Arsalan Salari, Susan Marzolini

{"title":"Comparison of Acute Hemodynamic Response to One-Set of Resistance Exercise With Low-Load to Concentric Failure and High-Load Resistance Exercise in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A RANDOMIZED CROSSOVER TRIAL.","authors":"Adel Ghorbani, Payam Saidie, Tolou Hasandokht, Seyed Mohammad Taghi Razavi Tousi, Arsalan Salari, Susan Marzolini","doi":"10.1097/HCR.0000000000001034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study assessed acute physiological responses to a single set of low-load biceps curls to concentric failure resistance exercise (LLCF-RE; 40% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) compared with traditional/recommended high-load resistance exercise (HL-RE; 70% of 1RM, 10 repetitions) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).Methods: In this randomized crossover clinical trial, 18 patients with stable CAD were randomized to 1 of 2 sequences: (A) LLCF-RE followed by HL-RE 24 to 48 hours later or (B) HL-RE followed by LLCF-RE 24 to 48 hours later. Hemodynamic responses including rate pressure product (RPP), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) were measured at baseline, immediately after exercise, and 3-minute post-exercise. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was also assessed.Results: Both protocols resulted in significant increases in hemodynamic measures post-exercise (P < .05), with no significant time × condition interactions (P > .05). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated good agreement between LLCF-RE and HL-RE with small mean biases (RPP: 3.09; SBP: 0.61 mm Hg; DBP: 3.00 mm Hg; HR: 2.28 beats/min; RPE: -0.61) and acceptable limits of agreement (RPP: -30.55 to 36.72; SBP: -25.19 to 26.41 mm Hg; DBP: -10.17 to 16.17 mm Hg; HR: -14.49 to 19.04 beats/min; RPE: -3.47 to 2.25).Conclusions: In screened patients with CAD, LLCF-RE elicits similar cardiovascular responses to traditional HL-RE when performed with proper technique. Given its potential advantages, such as reduced joint stress, LLCF-RE may be a suitable alternative for some patients. Further research is warranted to evaluate safety, particularly across multiple sets, and to determine whether LLCF-RE yields comparable long-term benefits to HL-RE in larger and more diverse populations with CAD.","PeriodicalId":15192,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HCR.0000000000001034","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study assessed acute physiological responses to a single set of low-load biceps curls to concentric failure resistance exercise (LLCF-RE; 40% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) compared with traditional/recommended high-load resistance exercise (HL-RE; 70% of 1RM, 10 repetitions) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

Methods: In this randomized crossover clinical trial, 18 patients with stable CAD were randomized to 1 of 2 sequences: (A) LLCF-RE followed by HL-RE 24 to 48 hours later or (B) HL-RE followed by LLCF-RE 24 to 48 hours later. Hemodynamic responses including rate pressure product (RPP), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) were measured at baseline, immediately after exercise, and 3-minute post-exercise. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was also assessed.

Results: Both protocols resulted in significant increases in hemodynamic measures post-exercise (P < .05), with no significant time × condition interactions (P > .05). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated good agreement between LLCF-RE and HL-RE with small mean biases (RPP: 3.09; SBP: 0.61 mm Hg; DBP: 3.00 mm Hg; HR: 2.28 beats/min; RPE: -0.61) and acceptable limits of agreement (RPP: -30.55 to 36.72; SBP: -25.19 to 26.41 mm Hg; DBP: -10.17 to 16.17 mm Hg; HR: -14.49 to 19.04 beats/min; RPE: -3.47 to 2.25).

Conclusions: In screened patients with CAD, LLCF-RE elicits similar cardiovascular responses to traditional HL-RE when performed with proper technique. Given its potential advantages, such as reduced joint stress, LLCF-RE may be a suitable alternative for some patients. Further research is warranted to evaluate safety, particularly across multiple sets, and to determine whether LLCF-RE yields comparable long-term benefits to HL-RE in larger and more diverse populations with CAD.

查看原文本刊更多论文

冠心病患者低负荷抗阻运动和高负荷抗阻运动对急性血流动力学反应的比较：一项随机交叉试验

目的：本研究评估了冠状动脉疾病（CAD）患者单组低负荷肱二头肌弯曲进行同心衰竭阻力运动（LLCF-RE； 40%的1次最大重复[1RM]）与传统/推荐的高负荷阻力运动（HL-RE； 70%的1RM， 10次重复）的急性生理反应。方法：在这项随机交叉临床试验中，18例稳定型CAD患者被随机分为2个顺序：(A) 24至48小时后LLCF-RE再进行HL-RE，或(B) 24至48小时后HL-RE再进行LLCF-RE。血流动力学反应包括心率压积（RPP）、收缩压（SBP）、舒张压（DBP）和心率（HR）在基线、运动后立即和运动后3分钟进行测量。同时评估感知运动强度（RPE）。结果：两种方案均导致运动后血流动力学指标显著增加（P < 0.05），无显著的时间与条件相互作用（P < 0.05）。Bland-Altman分析表明LLCF-RE和HL-RE之间具有良好的一致性，平均偏差较小（RPP: 3.09；收缩压：0.61 mm Hg；舒张压：3.00 mm Hg；心率：2.28次/分钟；RPE: -0.61），一致性的可接受范围（RPP: -30.55至36.72；收缩压：-25.19至26.41 mm Hg；舒张压：-10.17至16.17 mm Hg；心率：-14.49至19.04次/分钟；RPE: -3.47至2.25）。结论：在筛选的CAD患者中，如果采用适当的技术，LLCF-RE可引起与传统HL-RE相似的心血管反应。考虑到其潜在的优势，如减少关节压力，LLCF-RE可能是一些患者的合适选择。需要进一步的研究来评估安全性，特别是跨多组的安全性，并确定LLCF-RE是否能在更大、更多样化的CAD患者群体中产生与HL-RE相当的长期益处。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention 医学-心血管系统

CiteScore

5.40

自引率

34.20%

发文量

164

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： JCRP was the first, and remains the only, professional journal dedicated to improving multidisciplinary clinical practice and expanding research evidence specific to both cardiovascular and pulmonary rehabilitation. This includes exercise testing and prescription, behavioral medicine, and cardiopulmonary risk factor management. In 2007, JCRP expanded its scope to include primary prevention of cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases. JCRP publishes scientific and clinical peer-reviewed Original Investigations, Reviews, and Brief or Case Reports focused on the causes, prevention, and treatment of individuals with cardiovascular or pulmonary diseases in both a print and online-only format. Editorial features include Editorials, Invited Commentaries, Literature Updates, and Clinically-relevant Topical Updates. JCRP is the official Journal of the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Canadian Association of Cardiac Rehabilitation.