The Effects of Aerobic versus Resistance Training on Visceral and Liver Fat Stores, Liver Enzymes and HOMA from STRRIDE AT/RT: A Randomized Trial
While the benefits of exercise are clear, there are many unresolved issues surrounding the optimal exercise prescription. Many organizations recommend aerobic training (AT) and resistance training (RT), yet few studies have compared their effects alone or in combination . The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of AT, RT and the full combination (AT/RT) on central ectopic fat, liver enzymes and fasting insulin resistance (HOMA). In a randomized trial, 249 subjects, 18 to 70 years old, overweight, sedentary, and with moderate dyslipidemia (LDL cholesterol 130-190 mg/dL; or HDL cholesterol ≤40 mg/dL for men or ≤45 mg/dL for women), performed an initial four-month run-in period. Of these, 196 finished the run-in and were randomized into one of the following eight-month exercise training groups: 1) RT: 3 d/wk, 8 exercises, 3 sets/exercise, 8-12 repetitions/set, 2) AT: equivalent to ~19.2 km/wk (12 miles/wk) at 75% peakVO2, 3) full Aerobic Training plus full Resistance Training (AT/RT), with 155 subjects completing the intervention. The primary outcome variables were: visceral and liver fat via computed tomography, plasma liver enzymes, and HOMA. AT led to significant reductions in liver fat, visceral fat, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), HOMA and both total and subcutaneous abdominal fat (all P<0.05). RT resulted in a decrease in subcutaneous abdominal fat (P<0.05), but did not significantly improve the other variables. AT was more effective than RT at improving visceral fat, liver to spleen ratio, total abdominal fat (all P<0.05) and trended towards a greater reduction in liver fat score (P<0.10). The effects of AT/RT were statistically indistinguishable from AT. These data show that for overweight and obese individuals who want to reduce measures of visceral fat and fatty liver infiltration and improve HOMA and ALT, a moderate amount of aerobic exercise is the most time efficient and effective exercise mode.
Aerobic vs Resistance Training on Visceral/Liver Fat Stores
-
galapogos
- GM, Team Biceps
- Posts: 10432
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 2:35 am
- Location: In front of my computer
- Contact:
Re: Aerobic vs Resistance Training on Visceral/Liver Fat Sto
Comparison of Aerobic Versus Resistance Exercise Training Effects on Metabolic Syndrome (from the Studies of a Targeted Risk Reduction Intervention Through Defined Exercise - STRRIDE-AT/RT)
Aerobic training (AT) improves the metabolic syndrome (MS) and its component risk factors; however, to our knowledge, no randomized clinical studies have addressed whether resistance training (RT) improves the MS when performed alone or combined with AT. Sedentary, overweight dyslipidemic men and women, aged 18 to 70 years completed a 4-month inactive run-in period and were randomized to 1 of 3 eight-month exercise programs (n = 196). The exercise programs were (1) RT (3 days/week, 3 sets/day of 8 to 12 repetitions of 8 different exercises targeting all major muscle groups); (2) AT (∼120 minutes/week at 75% of the maximum oxygen uptake), and (3) AT and RT combined (AT/RT) (exact combination of AT and RT). Of the 196 randomized patients, 144 completed 1 of the 3 exercise programs. The 86 participants with complete data for all 5 MS criteria were used in the present analysis, and a continuous MS z score was calculated. Eight months of RT did not change the MS score. AT improved the MS score (p <0.07) and showed a trend toward significance compared to RT (p <0.10). AT/RT significantly decreased the MS score and was significantly different from RT alone. In conclusion, RT was not effective at improving the MS score; however, AT was effective. Combined AT and RT was similarly effective but not different from AT alone. When weighing the time commitment versus health benefit, the data suggest that AT alone was the most efficient mode of exercise for improving cardiometabolic health.
Same study, measuring different things
Aerobic training (AT) improves the metabolic syndrome (MS) and its component risk factors; however, to our knowledge, no randomized clinical studies have addressed whether resistance training (RT) improves the MS when performed alone or combined with AT. Sedentary, overweight dyslipidemic men and women, aged 18 to 70 years completed a 4-month inactive run-in period and were randomized to 1 of 3 eight-month exercise programs (n = 196). The exercise programs were (1) RT (3 days/week, 3 sets/day of 8 to 12 repetitions of 8 different exercises targeting all major muscle groups); (2) AT (∼120 minutes/week at 75% of the maximum oxygen uptake), and (3) AT and RT combined (AT/RT) (exact combination of AT and RT). Of the 196 randomized patients, 144 completed 1 of the 3 exercise programs. The 86 participants with complete data for all 5 MS criteria were used in the present analysis, and a continuous MS z score was calculated. Eight months of RT did not change the MS score. AT improved the MS score (p <0.07) and showed a trend toward significance compared to RT (p <0.10). AT/RT significantly decreased the MS score and was significantly different from RT alone. In conclusion, RT was not effective at improving the MS score; however, AT was effective. Combined AT and RT was similarly effective but not different from AT alone. When weighing the time commitment versus health benefit, the data suggest that AT alone was the most efficient mode of exercise for improving cardiometabolic health.
Same study, measuring different things