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.

In 30 seconds

This randomized crossover trial compared acute responses to one set of low-load biceps curls performed to concentric failure (40% of 1RM) with high-load exercise (70% of 1RM, 10 repetitions) in 18 patients with stable coronary artery disease. Both protocols significantly increased measured hemodynamic variables after exercise, with no significant time-by-condition interactions. Agreement between protocols was generally good; for example, mean bias in systolic blood pressure was 0.61 mm Hg. The findings apply to screened patients exercising with proper technique and do not establish safety or equivalent long-term benefit.

Key findings

• Both exercise protocols significantly increased hemodynamic measures after exercise (P < .05), with no significant time × condition interactions (P > .05).
• Mean bias between protocols was 0.61 mm Hg for systolic blood pressure and 2.28 beats/min for heart rate.
• For systolic blood pressure, the limits of agreement were -25.19 to 26.41 mm Hg.

Why it matters

Resistance exercise is relevant to rehabilitation for people with coronary artery disease, and this trial suggests that a low-load set taken to concentric failure can produce acute cardiovascular responses similar to a traditional high-load set in screened patients. The results may inform consideration of exercise options, but acute response comparisons alone cannot establish safety across repeated sets or comparable long-term outcomes.

What to keep in mind

The trial included 18 patients with stable CAD and assessed acute responses to a single set. It does not establish safety across multiple sets or long-term benefits in larger, more diverse populations.