A comprehensive analysis of the impact of high-intensity interval vs. moderate-intensity continuous training on global and regional myocardial function in patients early after acute myocardial infarction: the STRAICT randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: This study aims to compare the effect of moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) vs. isovolumic high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on left ventricular (LV) myocardial function early post-acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Training-induced changes were analysed at both global and segmental levels using advanced deformation echocardiographic imaging techniques. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred AMI patients were randomly assigned to participate in an 8-week training programme comprising either MICT (n = 50) or isovolumic HIIT (n = 50), starting within 6 weeks post-AMI. Before and after cardiac rehabilitation (CR), we carried out a comprehensive and detailed evaluation of myocardial function, including measurements of LV longitudinal strain (LS) and circumferential strain and torsional mechanics, LV myocardial work (MW) and mechanical dispersion [post-systolic shortenings (PSS)] indexes, and atrial strains. Mixed models were used to evaluate the effect of MICT and HIIT on speckle-tracking echocardiography parameter. Both MICT and HIIT resulted in a similar improvement in the amplitude and timing of LV LS (time effect P < 0.001 in each case), as depicted by the comparable increase in global LS [HIIT: -0.82%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.19/-61; MICT: -1.11%, 95% CI: -1.17/-0.51; time ∗ group P = 0.71], MW index and efficiency, constructive MW, and reduction in the number of PSS and wasted MW (time ∗ group P > 0.12 in each case) in the two groups. These improvements were observed in all myocardial territories, regardless of previous ischaemic risk status (culprit vessel-by-time-by-group interactions, P > 0.60 in each case). Circumferential strains remained unchanged in both groups while there was a trend (time ∗ group P = 0.04) for LV torsion to decrease for MICT (P = 0.06) and increase for HIIT (P = 0.36) after CR. Left atrial strains during the reservoir and conduit phases improved (time effect P < 0.05) similarly in MICT vs. HIIT (time ∗ group P > 0.54). V̇O2peak (P < 0.001) and quality of life (P < 0.001) improved equally in MICT and HIIT after CR. CONCLUSION: Early supervised exercise-based CR, whether using MICT or isovolumic HIIT, improves longitudinal myocardial function in both culprit and non-culprit territories after AMI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".