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

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention
Published
2026-06-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/hcr.0000000000001034
Primary Topic
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Seyed Mohammad Taghi Razavi Tousi, Payam Saidie, Adel Ghorbani, Tolou Hasandokht et al.
Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
article

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

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

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.

Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention
Toronto Rehabilitation Institute (CA), Good Samaritan Hospital (US), Biotechnology Research Institute (CA), University of Guilan (IR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.