Commentary on Aerobic versus isometric handgrip exercise in hypertension: a randomized controlled trial

We, members of the International Working Group on Isometric Exercise, read with great interest the article by Pagonas et al. on the comparative effects of aerobic and isometric handgrip exercise (IRT). However, we believe the finding, that aerobic exercise induces reductions in blood pressure (BP), whereas isometric exercise training (handgrip) does not, to be compromised for several reasons

An evidence-based guide to the efficacy and safety of isometric resistance training in hypertension and clinical implications.

More than 30 randomized controlled trials, supported by individual patient-level and group-level meta-analyses and a Delphi analysis of expert opinion, unequivocally show isometric resistance training (IRT) elicits antihypertensive benefits in healthy people and those with chronic illness. We aim to provide efficacy and safety evidence, and a guide for IRT prescription and delivery. Recommendations are made for the use of IRT in specific patient populations and appropriate methods for IRT delivery. Published data suggest IRT consistently elicits mean blood pressure reductions of 7.4/3.3 mmHg systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure, equivalent to antihypertensive medication monotherapy. Blood pressure reductions of this size are associated with an approximate 13% to 22% reduction in major cardiovascular events. Moreover, IRT is safe in a range of patient populations. We suggest that IRT has the greatest potential benefit when used as an antihypertensive therapy in individuals unwilling and/or unable to complete aerobic exercise, or who have had limited adherence or success with it; individuals with resistant or uncontrolled hypertension, already taking at least two pharmacological antihypertensive agents; and healthy or clinical populations, as an adjunct to aerobic exercise and dietary intervention in those who have not yet attained control of their hypertension. IRT is efficacious and produces clinically meaningful blood pressure reductions (systolic blood pressure, 7 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure, 3 mmHg). IRT is safe and typical program delivery requires only about 17 min weekly. IRT should be used as an adjunct to other exercise modalities, in people unable to complete other types of exercise, or in resistant hypertension. [Abstract copyright: © 2023. The Author(s).

Effect of Exercise Training on Interleukin-6, Tumour Necrosis Factor Alpha and Functional Capacity in Heart Failure

Background. We pooled data from four studies, to establish whether exercise training programs were able to modulate systemic cytokine levels of tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). A second aim was to establish if differences in ExT regimens are related to degree of change in cytokines and peak VO2. Methods. Data from four centres relating to training protocol, exercise capacity, and cytokine measures (TNF-alpha and IL-6) were pooled for analysis. Results. Data for 106 CHF patients were collated (98 men, age 62 ± 10 yrs, wt 79 ± 14 Kg). Patients were moderately impaired (peak VO2 16.9 ± 4.4 mls/kg/min), with moderate LV systolic dysfunction (EF 30 ± 6.9%), 78% (83) had ischaemic cardiomyopathy. After ExT, peak VO2 increased 1.4 ± 3.4 ml/kg/min (P < .001), serum TNF-alpha decreased 1.9 ± 8.6 pg/ml (P = .02) and IL-6 was not significantly changed (0.5 ± 5.4 pg/ml, P = .32) for the whole group. Baseline and post-training peak VO2 changes were not correlated with change in cytokine levels. Conclusions. Exercise training reduces levels TNF-alpha but not IL-6 in CHF. However, across a heterogenic patient group, change in peak VO2 was not correlated with alterations in cytokine levels. While greater exercise volume (hours) was superior in improving peak VO2, no particular characteristic of ExT regimes appeared superior in effecting change in serum cytokines

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improves exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in people with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised trials

Objective: The aim of this study was to undertake a contemporary review of the impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) targeted at patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: We conducted searches of PubMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library of Controlled Trials (up until 30 November 2017) using key terms related to exercise-based CR and AF. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials were included if they compared the effects of an exercise-based CR intervention to a no exercise or usual care control group. Meta-analyses of outcomes were conducted where appropriate. Results: The nine randomised trials included 959 (483 exercise-based CR vs 476 controls) patients with various types of AF. Compared with control, pooled analysis showed no difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.53, p=0.64) following exercise-based CR. However, there were improvements in health-related quality of life (mean SF-36 mental component score (MCS): 4.00, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.74; p=0.04 and mean SF-36 physical component score: 1.82, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.59; p=0.04) and exercise capacity (mean peak VO2: 1.59 ml/kg/min, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.08; p=0.04; mean 6 min walk test: 46.9 m, 95% CI 26.4 to 67.4; p&lt;0.001) with exercise-based CR. Improvements were also seen in AF symptom burden and markers of cardiac function. Conclusions: Exercise capacity, cardiac function, symptom burden and health-related quality of life were improved with exercise-based CR in the short term (up to 6 months) targeted at patients with AF. However, high-quality multicentre randomised trials are needed to clarify the impact of exercise-based CR on key patient and health system outcomes (including health-related quality of life, mortality, hospitalisation and costs) and how these effects may vary across AF subtypes

Operative <i>versus </i>conservative management for inguinal hernia:a methodology scoping review of randomized controlled trials

Introduction: There is a lack of consensus on the management of inguinal hernia with limited symptoms. To address this issue a systematic review of existing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was performed to critically appraise all existing data on asymptomatic hernia management, focusing on generalizability. Methods: A scoping review to identify all RCTs comparing surgical and conservative management of patients with inguinal hernias was undertaken. Medline, Embase, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Data collected included study characteristics and definitions of population, intervention/comparator, and outcomes; and limitations of each study were also extracted. The quality and generalizability of included RCTs were evaluated using Cochrane’s ROB-2 and the PRECIS-2 tool, respectively. Results: Searches returned 661 papers; 14 full-text papers were assessed and three RCTs were identified. All RCTs included only male patients with a mean age above 55 years. All RCTs included asymptomatic patients and two included those with minimal symptoms. Different definitions for ‘minimally symptomatic’ were used in RCTs and none provided details of what was meant by conservative treatment. Follow-up periods varied between studies (1, 2, 3 years). All RCTs had an overall high risk of bias. According to PRECIS-2, two RCTs were classified as pragmatic, and one was equally pragmatic and explanatory. Discussion: This systematic review highlights a high risk of bias but a good generalizability of the findings from the RCTs conducted on minimally symptomatic inguinal hernia patients. To improve the guidelines for the management of this group of patients, more generalizable data are needed

Operative <i>versus </i>conservative management for inguinal hernia:a methodology scoping review of randomized controlled trials

Introduction: There is a lack of consensus on the management of inguinal hernia with limited symptoms. To address this issue a systematic review of existing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was performed to critically appraise all existing data on asymptomatic hernia management, focusing on generalizability. Methods: A scoping review to identify all RCTs comparing surgical and conservative management of patients with inguinal hernias was undertaken. Medline, Embase, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Data collected included study characteristics and definitions of population, intervention/comparator, and outcomes; and limitations of each study were also extracted. The quality and generalizability of included RCTs were evaluated using Cochrane’s ROB-2 and the PRECIS-2 tool, respectively. Results: Searches returned 661 papers; 14 full-text papers were assessed and three RCTs were identified. All RCTs included only male patients with a mean age above 55 years. All RCTs included asymptomatic patients and two included those with minimal symptoms. Different definitions for ‘minimally symptomatic’ were used in RCTs and none provided details of what was meant by conservative treatment. Follow-up periods varied between studies (1, 2, 3 years). All RCTs had an overall high risk of bias. According to PRECIS-2, two RCTs were classified as pragmatic, and one was equally pragmatic and explanatory. Discussion: This systematic review highlights a high risk of bias but a good generalizability of the findings from the RCTs conducted on minimally symptomatic inguinal hernia patients. To improve the guidelines for the management of this group of patients, more generalizable data are needed

Surgical site infections after emergency hernia repair:substudy from the Management of Acutely Symptomatic Hernia (MASH) study

Introduction: Acutely symptomatic abdominal wall and groin hernias (ASH) are a common acute surgical presentation. There are limited data to guide decisions related to surgical repair technique and use of antibiotics, which can be driven by increased risk of surgical site infection (SSI) in this group. This study aims to report rates of SSI following ASH repair and explore the use of patient-reported outcome measure reporting in this setting.Methods: An 18-week, UK-based, multicentre prospective cohort study (NCT04197271) recruited adults with ASH. This study reports operatively managed patients. Data on patient characteristics, inpatient management, quality of life, complications, and wound healing (Bluebelle score) were collected. Descriptive analyses were performed to estimate event rates of SSI and regression analysis explored the relationship between Bluebelle scores and SSI. The 30 and 90-day follow-up visits assessed complications and quality of life.Results: The MASH study recruited 273 patients, of whom 218 were eligible for this study, 87.2 per cent who underwent open repair. Mesh was used in 123 patients (50.8 per cent). Pre- and postoperative antibiotics were given in 163 (67.4 per cent) and 28 (11.5 per cent) patients respectively. There were 26 reported SSIs (11.9 per cent). Increased BMI, incisional, femoral, and umbilical hernia were associated with higher rates of SSI (P = 0.006). In 238 patients, there was a difference in healthy utility values at 90 days between patients with and without SSI (P = 0.025). Also, when analysing 191 patients with Bluebelle scores, those who developed an SSI had higher Bluebelle values (P &lt; 0.001).Conclusion: SSI is frequent in repair of acutely symptomatic hernia and correlates with BMI and site of hernia

Local Instrumental Variable Methods to Address Confounding and Heterogeneity when Using Electronic Health Records: An Application to Emergency Surgery

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) offer opportunities for comparative effectiveness research to inform decision making. However, to provide useful evidence, these studies must address confounding and treatment effect heterogeneity according to unmeasured prognostic factors. Local instrumental variable (LIV) methods can help studies address these challenges, but have yet to be applied to EHR data. This article critically examines a LIV approach to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of emergency surgery (ES) for common acute conditions from EHRs. METHODS: This article uses hospital episodes statistics (HES) data for emergency hospital admissions with acute appendicitis, diverticular disease, and abdominal wall hernia to 175 acute hospitals in England from 2010 to 2019. For each emergency admission, the instrumental variable for ES receipt was each hospital's ES rate in the year preceding the emergency admission. The LIV approach provided individual-level estimates of the incremental quality-adjusted life-years, costs and net monetary benefit of ES, which were aggregated to the overall population and subpopulations of interest, and contrasted with those from traditional IV and risk-adjustment approaches. RESULTS: The study included 268,144 (appendicitis), 138,869 (diverticular disease), and 106,432 (hernia) patients. The instrument was found to be strong and to minimize covariate imbalance. For diverticular disease, the results differed by method; although the traditional approaches reported that, overall, ES was not cost-effective, the LIV approach reported that ES was cost-effective but with wide statistical uncertainty. For all 3 conditions, the LIV approach found heterogeneity in the cost-effectiveness estimates across population subgroups: in particular, ES was not cost-effective for patients with severe levels of frailty. CONCLUSIONS: EHRs can be combined with LIV methods to provide evidence on the cost-effectiveness of routinely provided interventions, while fully recognizing heterogeneity. HIGHLIGHTS: This article addresses the confounding and heterogeneity that arise when assessing the comparative effectiveness from electronic health records (EHR) data, by applying a local instrumental variable (LIV) approach to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of emergency surgery (ES) versus alternative strategies, for patients with common acute conditions (appendicitis, diverticular disease, and abdominal wall hernia).The instrumental variable, the hospital's tendency to operate, was found to be strongly associated with ES receipt and to minimize imbalances in baseline characteristics between the comparison groups.The LIV approach found that, for each condition, there was heterogeneity in the estimates of cost-effectiveness according to baseline characteristics.The study illustrates how an LIV approach can be applied to EHR data to provide cost-effectiveness estimates that recognize heterogeneity and can be used to inform decision making as well as to generate hypotheses for further research

An evidence-based guide to the efficacy and safety of isometric resistance training in hypertension and clinical implications

More than 30 randomized controlled trials, supported by individual patient-level and group-level meta-analyses and a Delphi analysis of expert opinion, unequivocally show isometric resistance training (IRT) elicits antihypertensive benefits in healthy people and those with chronic illness. We aim to provide efficacy and safety evidence, and a guide for IRT prescription and delivery. Recommendations are made for the use of IRT in specific patient populations and appropriate methods for IRT delivery. Published data suggest IRT consistently elicits mean blood pressure reductions of 7.4/3.3 mmHg systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure, equivalent to antihypertensive medication monotherapy. Blood pressure reductions of this size are associated with an approximate 13% to 22% reduction in major cardiovascular events. Moreover, IRT is safe in a range of patient populations. We suggest that IRT has the greatest potential benefit when used as an antihypertensive therapy in individuals unwilling and/or unable to complete aerobic exercise, or who have had limited adherence or success with it; individuals with resistant or uncontrolled hypertension, already taking at least two pharmacological antihypertensive agents; and healthy or clinical populations, as an adjunct to aerobic exercise and dietary intervention in those who have not yet attained control of their hypertension. IRT is efficacious and produces clinically meaningful blood pressure reductions (systolic blood pressure, 7 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure, 3 mmHg). IRT is safe and typical program delivery requires only about 17 min weekly. IRT should be used as an adjunct to other exercise modalities, in people unable to complete other types of exercise, or in resistant hypertension