Effects of eccentric cycling training on aerobic and functional capacity in patients with heart failure: A randomised controlled trial.

J Sci Med SportJun 11, 2026 (epub)

Lucy M Stauborg, Andrew Haynes, Andrew J Maiorana et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This randomised controlled trial compared eccentric with conventional concentric cycling in people with heart failure. Seventy participants were assigned to training, and 45 completed the intervention; both groups trained twice weekly for 12 weeks after familiarisation. Both approaches improved peak oxygen consumption: eccentric cycling increased it from 17.7 ± 4.8 to 19.1 ± 5.2, while concentric cycling increased it from 17.4 ± 6.0 to 19.8 ± 6.0 mL·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹ (P = 0.002). Walking distance and sit-to-stand performance also improved in both groups. Eccentric training additionally improved timed up-and-go and the questionnaire’s mental domain, with lower perceived exertion during training.

Key findings

  • Peak oxygen consumption improved in both groups: eccentric, 17.7 ± 4.8 to 19.1 ± 5.2; concentric, 17.4 ± 6.0 to 19.8 ± 6.0 mL·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹ (P = 0.002).
  • Six-minute walk distance increased in both groups: eccentric, 476 ± 77 to 547 ± 80 m; concentric, 485 ± 106 to 516 ± 113 m (P < 0.001).
  • Thirty-second sit-to-stand performance improved in both groups; timed up-and-go and the mental quality-of-life domain improved after eccentric, but not concentric, cycling.
  • Perceived exertion during training was lower with eccentric cycling (P = 0.018).

Why it matters

The findings suggest that both cycling modes can improve aerobic capacity and selected functional outcomes in people with heart failure. Eccentric cycling may offer additional functional and perceived-exertion benefits, although the abstract does not establish that it is superior overall. These results help frame eccentric cycling as a training approach worth evaluating alongside conventional cycling.

What to keep in mind

Only 45 of 70 randomised participants completed the intervention, and the abstract does not report comparative between-group effect estimates for the outcomes.

Source

Published in J Sci Med Sport. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Cardiology

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.