Safety of High-Intensity, Low-Volume Interval Training or Continuous Aerobic Training in Adults With Metabolic Syndrome

High-intensity interval training for cardiometabolic health in adults with metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) compared with traditional moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) and/or non-exercise control (CON) for modification of metabolic syndrome (MetS) components and other cardiometabolic health outcomes in individuals with MetS.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis DATA SOURCES: Five databases were searched from inception to March 2024.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

Meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HIIT with MICT/CON were performed for components of MetS (waist circumference (WC), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglyceride (TG), and fasting blood glucose (BG)) and clinically relevant cardiometabolic health parameters. Subgroup moderator analyses were conducted based on the intervention duration and HIIT volume.

RESULTS

Out of 4819 studies, 23 RCTs involving 1374 participants were included (mean age: 46.2-67.0 years, 55% male). HIIT significantly improved WC (weighted mean difference (WMD) -4.12 cm, 95% CI -4.71 to -3.53), SBP (WMD -6.05 mm Hg, 95% CI -8.11 to -4.00), DBP (WMD -3.68 mm Hg, 95% CI -5.70 to -1.65), HDL-C (WMD 0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.20), TG (WMD -0.34 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.27) and BG (WMD -0.35 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.16) compared with CON (all p<0.01). HIIT approaches demonstrated comparable effects to MICT across all parameters. Subgroup analyses suggested that HIIT protocols with low volume (ie, <15 min of high-intensity exercise per session) were not inferior to higher volume protocols for improving MetS components.

CONCLUSION

This review supports HIIT as an efficacious exercise strategy for improving cardiometabolic health in individuals with MetS. Low-volume HIIT appears to be a viable alternative to traditional forms of aerobic exercise.

Efficacy of Interval Training in Improving Body Composition and Adiposity in Apparently Healthy Adults: An Umbrella Review with Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although the efficacy of interval training for improving body composition has been summarized in an increasing number of systematic reviews in recent years, discrepancies in review findings and conclusions have been observed.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy of interval training compared with moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) and nonexercise control (CON) in reducing body adiposity in apparently healthy adults.

METHODS

An umbrella review with meta-analysis was performed. A systematic search was conducted in seven databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database, CINAHL, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) up to October 2023. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing interval training and MICT/CON were included. Literature selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment (AMSTAR-2) were conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the type of interval training [high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT)], intervention duration, body mass index, exercise modality, and volume of HIIT protocols.

RESULTS

Sixteen systematic reviews, including 79 RCTs and 2474 unique participants, met the inclusion criteria. Most systematic reviews had a critically low (n = 6) or low (n = 6) AMSTAR-2 score. Interval training demonstrated significantly greater reductions in total body fat percent (BF%) compared with MICT [weighted mean difference (WMD) of - 0.77%; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 1.12 to - 0.32%] and CON (WMD of - 1.50%; 95% CI - 2.40 to - 0.58%). Significant reductions in fat mass, visceral adipose tissue, subcutaneous abdominal fat, and android abdominal fat were also observed following interval training compared to CON. Subgroup analyses indicated that both HIIT and SIT resulted in superior BF% loss than MICT. These benefits appeared to be more prominent in individuals with overweight/obesity and longer duration interventions (≥ 12 weeks), as well as in protocols using cycling as a modality and low-volume HIIT (i.e., < 15 min of high-intensity exercise per session).

CONCLUSIONS

This novel umbrella review with large-scale meta-analysis provides an updated synthesis of evidence with implications for physical activity guideline recommendations. The findings support interval training as a viable exercise strategy for reducing adiposity in the general population.

Efficacy of high-intensity interval training versus continuous training on serum myonectin and lipid outcomes in adults with metabolic syndrome: A post-hoc analysis of a clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Myonectin is a myokine with potential effects on the lipid metabolism; however, its regulation by exercise in humans remains unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy of high-intensity interval training low-volume (HIIT) versus moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on serum myonectin, serum lipids, appendicular fat and lean mass, and intramuscular lipids in humans.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a controlled, randomized, clinical trial in adults of both sexes with metabolic syndrome, who underwent a supervised, three-times/week, 12-week treadmill program. HIIT (n = 29) consisted of six intervals with one-minute, high-intensity phases at 90% of peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) for a total of 22 min. MICT (n = 31) trained at 60% of VO2peak for 36 min. Serum myonectin was measured using a human enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Lipid profile was determined by enzymatic methods and free fatty acids (FFA) were measured by gas chromatography. Fat and lean mass were assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Intramuscular lipids were measured through proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

RESULTS

Subjects had a mean age of 50.8±6.0 years and body mass index of 30.6±4.0 kg/m2. Compared to MICT, HIIT was not superior at increasing serum myonectin (p = 0.661) or linoleic acid (p = 0.263), reducing palmitic (p = 0.286) or stearic acid (p = 0.350), or improving lipid profile (all p>0.05), appendicular fat mass index -AFMI- (p = 0.713) or appendicular lean mass percentage -ALM- (p = 0.810). Compared to baseline, only HIIT significantly increased myonectin (p = 0.042), with a large effect size, although both interventions reduced AFMI and increased ALM with a large effect size. Lipid profile, FFA and intramuscular lipids did not change in any intervention group (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to MICT, HIIT low volume did not demonstrate superiority in improving serum lipids. The fact that both training types reduced AFMI without paralleled significant changes in serum myonectin suggests that this myokine may have a minor effect on short-middle-term exercise-induced fat mobilization.

Efficacy of high-intensity interval- or continuous aerobic-training on insulin resistance and muscle function in adults with metabolic syndrome: a clinical trial

PURPOSE

We carried out a randomized, clinical trial in adults of both sexes with metabolic syndrome (MS) to assess the efficacy of high-intensity, low-volume interval training (HIIT) compared to moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) on insulin resistance (IR), muscle mass, muscle activation, and serum musclin.

METHODS

Fasting glycemia, insulinemia, and glycated haemoglobin were determined by conventional methods, IR by Homeostatic model assessment (HOMA), lean mass by Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry, muscle activation through carnosine by Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, and musclin by Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay before and after a supervised, three-times/week, 12-week treadmill programme. HIIT (n = 29) consisted of six intervals with one-minute, high-intensity phases at 90% of peak oxygen consumption (VO_2peak). MICT (n = 31) trained at 60% of VO_2peak for 30 min.

RESULTS

Patients had a mean age of 50.8 ± 6.0 years, body mass index of 30.6 ± 4.0 kg/m², and VO_2peak of 29.0 ± 6.3 mL.kg^-1.min^-1. Compared to MICT, HIIT was not superior at reducing Ln HOMA-IR (adjusted mean difference: 0.083 [95%CI - 0.092 to 0.257]), carnosine or musclin or at increasing thigh lean mass. HIIT increased carnosine by 0.66 mmol/kg.ww (95% CI 0.08-1.24) after intervention. Both interventions reduced IR, body fat percentage and increased total lean mass/height² and VO_2peak. Musclin showed a non-significant reduction with a small effect size after both interventions.

CONCLUSION

Compared to MICT, HIIT is not superior at reducing IR, carnosine or musclin or at increasing skeletal muscle mass in adults with MS. Both training types improved IR, muscle mass and body composition. NCT03087721, March 22nd, 2017.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03087721. Registered March 22nd, 2017.