| Authors | Sophie Cassidy, Christian Thoma, Kate Hallsworth, Jehill Parikh, Kieren G. Hollingsworth, Roy Taylor, Djordje G. Jakovljević, Michael I. Trenell |
| Journal | Diabetologia |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI | 10.1007/s00125-015-3741-2 |
| Citations | 209 |
TL;DR
Twelve weeks of high intensity intermittent training (HIIT) improved heart structure and pumping function, reduced liver fat by 39%, and lowered HbA1c in people with type 2 diabetes — suggesting that brief, intense exercise intervals can reverse early cardiac damage and metabolic dysfunction without requiring long workout sessions.
The researchers tested whether high intensity intermittent training (HIIT) could improve heart structure and function in people with type 2 diabetes who had no diagnosed heart disease. They also measured effects on liver fat, visceral fat, blood sugar control, and overall fitness.
Intervention: HIIT performed on a stationary cycle ergometer, three sessions per week for 12 weeks. Each session consisted of:
Comparator: Standard care — participants were instructed to continue their usual lifestyle and medical management without any structured exercise program.
Primary outcome: Left ventricular structure (wall mass) and systolic function (stroke volume — the amount of blood pumped per heartbeat)
Secondary outcomes: Diastolic function (early filling rates), cardiac torsion (twisting motion of the heart), liver fat percentage, visceral fat, HbA1c, fasting glucose, 2-hour glucose during an oral glucose tolerance test, and peak oxygen consumption (VO₂peak)
Cardiac structure and function: 3.0 Tesla MRI (Philips Achieva) — a high-field-strength scanner that provides detailed images of the heart. Key measurements included:
Cardiac tagging: A specialised MRI technique that applies a grid pattern to the heart muscle and tracks how it deforms during contraction. This measured:
Cardiac energy metabolism: ³¹P-magnetic resonance spectroscopy — measured the ratio of phosphocreatine (PCr) to ATP, which reflects the energy status of heart muscle cells
Liver fat: ¹H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy — a precise, non-invasive method that measures the fat fraction within liver tissue as a percentage of total signal
Visceral fat: Three-point Dixon MRI sequence at the L4-L5 spinal level — measures the deep abdominal fat surrounding organs
Glycaemic control:
Fitness: Peak oxygen consumption (VO₂peak) measured during a maximal exercise test on a semirecumbent cycle ergometer, with resistance increasing by 1 W every 6 seconds until exhaustion
Blood markers: Liver enzymes (ALT, AST, ALP), lipids (total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, triglycerides), and blood pressure
MRI analysis was performed by a single observer blinded to group allocation — meaning the person measuring the heart images did not know which group each participant was in.
Study design: Randomised controlled trial (RCT) — the gold standard for testing whether an intervention causes an effect.
Randomisation: Simple random allocation sequence generated by an online tool (www.randomization.com). Concealed envelopes with consecutive numbers were locked in a drawer and withdrawn in numerical order by the main author. This means the researchers could not predict or influence which group a participant would be assigned to.
Blinding:
Duration: 12 weeks of intervention, with measurements taken at baseline and after 12 weeks. Glucose control was measured 48–72 hours after the final exercise session to avoid capturing the acute (immediate) effects of exercise on blood sugar.
Exercise adherence: Not explicitly reported in the abstract, but the full text notes that participants completed the prescribed sessions (no adverse events were recorded).
Statistical approach: Intention-to-treat analysis — meaning all participants who started were included in the final analysis, even if they didn't complete the study. This is the conservative approach that preserves the benefits of randomisation. Between-group comparisons were made (HIIT vs control), with p-values reported for key outcomes.
What this design can prove:
What this design cannot prove:
Major methodological weaknesses:
Primary outcomes — Cardiac structure and function:
Left ventricular wall mass increased in the HIIT group (104±17 g to 116±20 g) compared to control (107±25 g to 105±25 g), p<0.05. This represents a ~12% increase in heart muscle mass — but importantly, this was physiological (healthy) hypertrophy, not pathological (disease-related) thickening, as it was accompanied by improved function.
Stroke volume increased in the HIIT group (76±16 ml to 87±19 ml) compared to control (79±14 ml to 75±15 ml), p<0.01. This is a ~14% increase in the amount of blood pumped per heartbeat.
Early diastolic filling rate increased in the HIIT group (241±84 ml/s to 299±89 ml/s) compared to control (250±44 ml/s to 251±47 ml/s), p<0.05. This is a ~24% improvement in how fast the heart relaxes and fills with blood.
Peak torsion decreased in the HIIT group (8.1±1.8° to 6.9±1.6°) compared to control (7.1±2.2° to 7.6±1.9°), p<0.05. This reduction in twisting motion is actually a positive sign — it indicates the heart is no longer overcompensating for stiffness.
Ejection fraction did not change significantly (was normal at baseline in both groups).
Cardiac energy metabolism (PCr/ATP ratio) did not change significantly.
Secondary outcomes — Metabolic and body composition:
Liver fat decreased by 39% relative reduction in the HIIT group (p<0.05). Absolute values not reported in the abstract, but baseline was ~7% in both groups.
HbA1c decreased in the HIIT group (7.1±1.0% [54.5 mmol/mol] to 6.8±0.9% [51.3 mmol/mol]) compared to control (7.2±0.5% [54.9 mmol/mol] to 7.4±0.7% [57.0 mmol/mol]), p<0.05. This is a 0.3 percentage point reduction in HbA1c.
Changes in liver fat correlated with changes in HbA1c (r=0.70, p<0.000) and with changes in 2-hour glucose (r=0.57, p<0.004). This means people who lost more liver fat also had greater improvements in blood sugar control.
VO₂peak increased in the HIIT group (21.8±5.4 to 25.6±6.0 ml/kg/min) compared to control (20.3±6.1 to 20.0±5.9 ml/kg/min), p<0.001. This is a ~17% improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness.
Fasting glucose, 2-hour glucose, and area under the glucose curve did not change significantly between groups (though the correlation with liver fat suggests individual variation).
Visceral fat did not change significantly.
Body weight did not change significantly (both groups remained ~90 kg).
Blood pressure did not change significantly.
Liver enzymes (ALT, AST, ALP) did not change significantly.
Heart function: The 14% increase in stroke volume means that after 12 weeks of HIIT, each heartbeat pumped about 11 ml more blood. For context, a typical resting stroke volume is 60–80 ml, so this is a meaningful improvement — roughly equivalent to what you'd expect from several months of endurance training. The 24% improvement in diastolic filling rate means the heart relaxed and refilled about 58 ml/s faster — this is a large effect that moves many participants from "impaired relaxation" toward normal function.
Liver fat: The 39% relative reduction in liver fat is striking. If someone started with 7% liver fat (mild-to-moderate fatty liver), a 39% reduction would bring them to about 4.3% — below the typical threshold for fatty liver disease (5%). This is the largest reduction in liver fat ever recorded from an exercise intervention at the time of publication. For comparison, weight loss of 5-10% of body weight typically reduces liver fat by 20-50%, but participants in this study did not lose weight — meaning HIIT reduced liver fat independently of weight loss.
Blood sugar control: The 0.3 percentage point reduction in HbA1c (from 7.1% to 6.8%) is modest but clinically meaningful. For someone with type 2 diabetes, each 1% reduction in HbA1c is associated with a 14% reduction in heart attack risk and a 37% reduction in microvascular complications. A 0.3% reduction is roughly one-third of that benefit — not trivial, but not a cure.
Fitness: The 17% improvement in VO₂peak (from 21.8 to 25.6 ml/kg/min) is substantial for a 12-week program in previously sedentary older adults. This moves someone from "poor" to "fair" cardiorespiratory fitness for their age group.
What the authors acknowledge:
What a critical reader would note:
For someone running their own n=1 experiment:
What to test:
Minimum meaningful duration:
What to measure (specific metrics):
Related papers
Associations Between Extreme Temperatures and Cardiovascular Cause-Specific Mortality: Results From 27 Countries
Barrak Alahmad, Haitham Khraishah, Dominic Royé +43 more · 2022
RCTEffectiveness of home-based and remotely supervised aerobic exercise in Parkinson's disease: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial
Nicolien M. van der Kolk, Nienke M. de Vries, Roy P. C. Kessels +4 more · 2019
RCTA Comparison of Lipid and Glycemic Effects of Pioglitazone and Rosiglitazone in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Dyslipidemia
Ronald Goldberg, David M. Kendall, Mark A. Deeg +8 more · 2005
Meta-analysisA Practical and Time-Efficient High-Intensity Interval Training Program Modifies Cardio-Metabolic Risk Factors in Adults with Risk Factors for Type II Diabetes
Bethan E. Phillips, Benjamin M. Kelly, Mats Lilja +9 more · 2017