Search

IntroductionLocomotor high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is a promising intervention for stroke rehabilitation that typically involves bursts of fast treadmill walking alternated with recovery periods. However, overground translation of treadmill speed gains has been somewhat limited, some important outcomes have not been tested and baseline response predictors are poorly understood. This pilot study aimed to guide future research by assessing preliminary outcomes of combined overground and treadmill HIIT.MethodsTen participants >6 months post stroke completed a multi-domain assessment battery before and after a 4-week no-intervention control phase, then again after a 4-week treatment phase involving 12 sessions of overground and treadmill HIIT. The primary analyses assessed relative changes in overground and treadmill walking speeds after HIIT, evaluated responsiveness of different outcome measures and estimated effects of baseline gait speed on treatment response.ResultsOverground and treadmill gait function both improved during the treatment phase relative to the control phase, with overground speed changes averaging 61% of treadmill speed changes (95% CI: 33-89%). Moderate or larger effect sizes were observed for measures of gait performance, balance, fitness, cognition, fatigue, perceived change and brain volume. Participants with baseline comfortable gait speed DiscussionFuture locomotor HIIT studies should consider including: 1) both overground and treadmill training; 2) measures of cognition, fatigue and brain volume, to complement typical motor & fitness assessment; and 3) baseline gait speed as a covariate.

Aerobic exercise may acutely prime the brain to be more responsive to rehabilitation, thus facilitating neurologic recovery from conditions like stroke. This aerobic priming effect could occur through multiple mechanisms, including upregulation of circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), increased corticospinal excitability, and decreased intracortical inhibition. However, optimal exercise parameters for targeting these mechanisms are poorly understood. This study tested the effects of exercise intensity on acute BDNF and neurophysiological responses. Sixteen ambulatory persons >6 mo poststroke performed three different 20-min exercise protocols in random order, approximately 1 wk apart, including the following: 1) treadmill high-intensity interval training (HIT-treadmill); 2) seated-stepper HIT (HIT-stepper); and 3) treadmill moderate-intensity continuous exercise (MCT-treadmill). Serum BDNF and transcranial magnetic stimulation measures of paretic lower limb excitability and inhibition were assessed at multiple time points during each session. Compared with MCT-treadmill, HIT-treadmill elicited significantly greater acute increases in circulating BDNF and corticospinal excitability. HIT-stepper initially showed BDNF responses similar to HIT-treadmill but was no longer significantly different from MCT-treadmill after decreasing the intensity in reaction to two hypotensive events. Additional regression analyses showed that an intensity sufficient to accumulate blood lactate appeared to be important for eliciting BDNF responses, that the interval training approach may have facilitated the corticospinal excitability increases, and that the circulating BDNF response was (negatively) related to intracortical inhibition. These findings further elucidate neurologic mechanisms of aerobic exercise and inform selection of optimal exercise-dosing parameters for enhancing acute neurologic effects. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Acute exercise-related increases in circulating BDNF and corticospinal excitability are thought to prime the brain for learning. Our data suggest that these responses can be obtained among persons with stroke using short-interval treadmill high-intensity interval training, that a vigorous aerobic intensity sufficient to generate lactate accumulation is needed to increase BDNF, that interval training facilitates increases in paretic quadriceps corticospinal excitability, and that greater BDNF response is associated with lesser intracortical inhibition response.

Background. Exercise intensity can influence functional recovery after stroke, but the mechanisms remain poorly understood. Objective. In chronic stroke, an intensity-dependent increase in circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) was previously found during vigorous exercise. Using the same serum samples, this study tested acute effects of exercise intensity on other circulating molecules related to neuroplasticity, including vascular-endothelial growth factor (VEGF), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF1), and cortisol, with some updated analyses involving BDNF. Methods. Using a repeated-measures design, 16 participants with chronic stroke performed 3 exercise protocols in random order: treadmill high-intensity interval training (HIT-treadmill), seated-stepper HIT (HIT-stepper), and treadmill moderate-intensity continuous exercise (MCT-treadmill). Serum molecular changes were compared between protocols. Mediation and effect modification analyses were also performed. Results. VEGF significantly increased during HIT-treadmill, IGF1 increased during both HIT protocols and cortisol nonsignificantly decreased during each protocol. VEGF response was significantly greater for HIT-treadmill versus MCT-treadmill when controlling for baseline. Blood lactate positively mediated the effect of HIT on BDNF and cortisol. Peak treadmill speed positively mediated effects on BDNF and VEGF. Participants with comfortable gait speed ≥0.4 m/s had significantly lower VEGF and higher IGF1 responses, with a lower cortisol response during MCT-treadmill. Conclusions. BDNF and VEGF are promising serum molecules to include in future studies testing intensity-dependent mechanisms of exercise on neurologic recovery. Fast training speed and anaerobic intensity appear to be critical ingredients for eliciting these molecular responses. Serum molecular response differences between gait speed subgroups provide a possible biologic basis for previously observed differences in training responsiveness.