Sharlene A Greenwood1, Pelagia Koufaki2, Thomas H Mercer2, Robert Rush2, Ellen O'Connor3, Rachel Tuffnell3, Herolin Lindup4, Lynda Haggis4, Tracy Dew5, Lyndsey Abdulnassir6, Eilish Nugent6, David Goldsmith6, Iain C Macdougall7. 1. Department of Renal Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Department of Physiotherapy, King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: sharlene.greenwood@nhs.net. 2. School of Health Sciences, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Renal Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Department of Physiotherapy, King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 4. Department of Physiotherapy, King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 5. Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 6. Department of Renal Medicine, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 7. Department of Renal Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in kidney transplant recipients. This pilot study examined the potential effect of aerobic training or resistance training on vascular health and indexes of cardiovascular risk in kidney transplant recipients. STUDY DESIGN: Single-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel trial. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 60 participants (mean age, 54 years; 34 men) were randomly assigned to aerobic training (n=20), resistance training (n=20), or usual care (n=20). Participants were included if they had a kidney transplant within 12 months prior to baseline assessment. Patients were excluded if they had unstable medical conditions or had recently started regular exercise. INTERVENTION: Aerobic training and resistance training were delivered 3 days per week for a 12-week period. The usual-care group received standard care. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Pulse wave velocity, peak oxygen uptake (Vo2peak), sit-to-stand 60, isometric quadriceps force, and inflammatory biomarkers were assessed at 0 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: The anticipated 60 participants were recruited within 12 months. 46 participants completed the study (aerobic training, n=13; resistance training, n=13; and usual care, n=20), resulting in a 23% attrition rate. Analyses of covariance, adjusted for baseline values, age, and dialysis vintage pretransplantation, revealed significant mean differences between aerobic training and usual care in pulse wave velocity of -2.2±0.4 (95% CI, -3.1 to -1.3) m/s (P<0.001) and between resistance training and usual care of -2.6±0.4 (95% CI, -3.4 to -1.7) m/s (P<0.001) at 12 weeks. Secondary analyses indicated significant improvements in Vo2peak in the aerobic training group and in Vo2peak, sit-to-stand 60, and isometric muscle force in the resistance training group compared with usual care at 12 weeks. There were no reported adverse events, cardiovascular events, or hospitalizations as a result of the intervention. LIMITATIONS: Pilot study, small sample size, no measure of endothelial function. CONCLUSIONS: Both aerobic training and resistance training interventions appear to be feasible and clinically beneficial in this patient population.
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in kidney transplant recipients. This pilot study examined the potential effect of aerobic training or resistance training on vascular health and indexes of cardiovascular risk in kidney transplant recipients. STUDY DESIGN: Single-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel trial. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 60 participants (mean age, 54 years; 34 men) were randomly assigned to aerobic training (n=20), resistance training (n=20), or usual care (n=20). Participants were included if they had a kidney transplant within 12 months prior to baseline assessment. Patients were excluded if they had unstable medical conditions or had recently started regular exercise. INTERVENTION: Aerobic training and resistance training were delivered 3 days per week for a 12-week period. The usual-care group received standard care. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Pulse wave velocity, peak oxygen uptake (Vo2peak), sit-to-stand 60, isometric quadriceps force, and inflammatory biomarkers were assessed at 0 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: The anticipated 60 participants were recruited within 12 months. 46 participants completed the study (aerobic training, n=13; resistance training, n=13; and usual care, n=20), resulting in a 23% attrition rate. Analyses of covariance, adjusted for baseline values, age, and dialysis vintage pretransplantation, revealed significant mean differences between aerobic training and usual care in pulse wave velocity of -2.2±0.4 (95% CI, -3.1 to -1.3) m/s (P<0.001) and between resistance training and usual care of -2.6±0.4 (95% CI, -3.4 to -1.7) m/s (P<0.001) at 12 weeks. Secondary analyses indicated significant improvements in Vo2peak in the aerobic training group and in Vo2peak, sit-to-stand 60, and isometric muscle force in the resistance training group compared with usual care at 12 weeks. There were no reported adverse events, cardiovascular events, or hospitalizations as a result of the intervention. LIMITATIONS: Pilot study, small sample size, no measure of endothelial function. CONCLUSIONS: Both aerobic training and resistance training interventions appear to be feasible and clinically beneficial in this patient population.
Authors: Dorien M Zelle; Gerald Klaassen; Edwin van Adrichem; Stephan J L Bakker; Eva Corpeleijn; Gerjan Navis Journal: Nat Rev Nephrol Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 28.314
Authors: Marina Serper; Iwan Barankay; Sakshum Chadha; Justine Shults; Lauren S Jones; Kim M Olthoff; Peter P Reese Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2020-02-12 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Mara A McAdams-DeMarco; Hao Ying; Sarah Van Pilsum Rasmussen; Jennifer Schrack; Christine E Haugen; Nadia M Chu; Marlís González Fernández; Niraj Desai; Jeremy D Walston; Dorry L Segev Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Meera N Harhay; Maya K Rao; Kenneth J Woodside; Kirsten L Johansen; Krista L Lentine; Stefan G Tullius; Ronald F Parsons; Tarek Alhamad; Joseph Berger; XingXing S Cheng; Jaqueline Lappin; Raymond Lynch; Sandesh Parajuli; Jane C Tan; Dorry L Segev; Bruce Kaplan; Jon Kobashigawa; Darshana M Dadhania; Mara A McAdams-DeMarco Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Baris Afsar; Dimitrie Siriopol; Gamze Aslan; Ozgur C Eren; Tuncay Dagel; Ugur Kilic; Asiye Kanbay; Alexandru Burlacu; Adrian Covic; Mehmet Kanbay Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: María José Pérez-Sáez; Andrea Morgado-Pérez; Anna Faura; Elena Muñoz-Redondo; Miguel Gárriz; Maria Dolors Muns; Xavier Nogués; Ester Marco; Julio Pascual Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2021-05-19