Effect of Caloric Restriction or Aerobic Exercise Training on Peak Oxygen Consumption and Quality of Life in Obese Older Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

Importance: More than 80% of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF), the most common form of heart failure among older persons, are overweight or obese. Exercise intolerance is the primary symptom of chronic HFPEF and a major determinant of reduced quality of life (QOL).

Objective: To determine whether caloric restriction (diet) or aerobic exercise training (exercise) improves exercise capacity and QOL in obese older patients with HFPEF.

Design, setting, and participants: Randomized, attention-controlled, 2 × 2 factorial trial conducted from February 2009 through November 2014 in an urban academic medical center. Of 577 initially screened participants, 100 older obese participants (mean [SD]: age, 67 years [5]; body mass index, 39.3 [5.6]) with chronic, stable HFPEF were enrolled (366 excluded by inclusion and exclusion criteria, 31 for other reasons, and 80 declined participation).

Interventions: Twenty weeks of diet, exercise, or both; attention control consisted of telephone calls every 2 weeks.

Main outcomes and measures: Exercise capacity measured as peak oxygen consumption (V̇O2, mL/kg/min; co-primary outcome) and QOL measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) Questionnaire (score range: 0-105, higher scores indicate worse heart failure-related QOL; co-primary outcome).

Results: Of the 100 enrolled participants, 26 participants were randomized to exercise; 24 to diet; 25 to exercise + diet; 25 to control. Of these, 92 participants completed the trial. Exercise attendance was 84% (SD, 14%) and diet adherence was 99% (SD, 1%). By main effects analysis, peak V̇O2 was increased significantly by both interventions: exercise, 1.2 mL/kg body mass/min (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.7), P < .001; diet, 1.3 mL/kg body mass/min (95% CI, 0.8 to 1.8), P < .001. The combination of exercise + diet was additive (complementary) for peak V̇O2 (joint effect, 2.5 mL/kg/min). There was no statistically significant change in MLHF total score with exercise and with diet (main effect: exercise, -1 unit [95% CI, -8 to 5], P = .70; diet, -6 units [95% CI, -12 to 1], P = .08). The change in peak V̇O2 was positively correlated with the change in percent lean body mass (r = 0.32; P = .003) and the change in thigh muscle:intermuscular fat ratio (r = 0.27; P = .02). There were no study-related serious adverse events. Body weight decreased by 7% (7 kg [SD, 1]) in the diet group, 3% (4 kg [SD, 1]) in the exercise group, 10% (11 kg [SD, 1] in the exercise + diet group, and 1% (1 kg [SD, 1]) in the control group.

Conclusions and relevance: Among obese older patients with clinically stable HFPEF, caloric restriction or aerobic exercise training increased peak V̇O2, and the effects may be additive. Neither intervention had a significant effect on quality of life as measured by the MLHF Questionnaire.

Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00959660.

Figure 1

CONSORT flow diagram.

Figure 2

Adjusted individual changes and means with 95% CIs at the 20-week follow-up visit relative to baseline by factorial group of the primary study outcomes: peak VO₂ (ml/kg/min, panel A) and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF Overall Score, range 0–105, higher score indicates worse HF-related QOL, panel B). The p-values represent comparison of least square means of the outcome measure following adjustment for baseline values, gender, and beta-blocker use. By factorial group, peak VO₂ data are missing in 4 cases: 2 in the Exercise group (due to gas leak and injury), 1 in the Diet group (due to injury), and 1 in the No Diet group (due to gas leak). By factorial group, MLHF data are missing in 4 cases: 2 in the Diet group, 1 in the Exercise group, and 1 in the No Exercise group all due to patient errors.