Análise esportômica sobre os efeitos agudos e crônicos de métodos de HIIT e HIFT no metabolismo, impacto na saúde e busca por biomarcadores mais sensíveis e agudos

Abstract

Sportomics studies seek to understand the immunometabolic alterations generated by different forms of exercise. Among the other training states, High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) and High-Intensity Functional Training (HIFT) emerge as the ones with the most increasing practice in the last decade. About the methods above, a lot is known about osteomioarticular injuries, but almost nothing about immunometabolic alterations and overload on organs and systems caused acutely and chronically. Thus, the present study sought to evaluate the metabolic stress and the impact on health caused by the new HIFT method and the possible differences between this and the more widespread HIIT method. This is a crosssectional study composed of two experiments, the first with a sample of 16 professional MMA athletes, male and aged between 23 and 36 years old, who performed a Crosscombat session, and the second with a sample of 10 individuals—aged between 23 and 49 years, being five high-level Crossfit athletes who performed a session of the method and five regular bodybuilders as a control group. Anthropometric data were recorded for sample characterization, and venous blood and urine were collected to measure biomarkers at all study times (eight times in the Crosscombat experiment and two times in the Crossfit experiment). Blood and urine samples were processed using the following equipment: Piccolo® General Chemistry 13 rotor (Abaxis, CA, USA), I chroma alpha® (Boditech Med Inc., Gangwon-do, Korea), CG4+ cartridge In I-STAT ( Abbot -Abbott Point of Care Inc. | 400 College Road East | Princeton, NJ USA 08540), CHEM8+ cartridge In I-STAT (Abbot -Abbott Point of Care Inc. | 400 College Road East | Princeton, NJ USA 08540), spectrophotometers and hematology counters. The hematocrit measurement did not change in both methods, with no acute change in the hydration status of the participants. Concerning the Crosscombat experiment, lactate increased 3.7 times. The cortisolemia decreased by 27% during SRecover. Serum myoglobin increased ~3.5-fold. D-dimer grew in 15 of the 16 athletes, ranging from 22 to 5.4-fold. CK-MB has increased by up to 20%. HSA has increased 12-14% in SRecover. Creatinine increased by 11%. Cystatin C increased 3.4-fold. HuA showed ~16- fold increase (1600%). Regarding the comparison between pre and post-exercise time between the Crossfit and Crosscombat experiments, it was possible to observe that after a section of the CFIT protocol, there was a 10,400% increase in microalbuminuria, notably greater than the 1,500% increase induced by CCombat. We compared lactate, cortisol, and eosinophils to analyze the possible effects of CCombat and CFit on the immunometabolic response. The CFIT protocol caused a 900% increase in blood lactate concentration and 50% in cortisol, while the CCombat protocol increased 250% for lactate and only 7% for cortisol. Differential eosinophil counts showed a 100% increase in the CFIT group, while CCombat induced a 34% decrease. The measurement of microalbuminuria is presented as cheap, noninvasive, and highly acute, increasing even before there is a change in the classic markers of renal function and there is a change in the glomerular filtration rate. Cortisol dosage was used as an exclusion criterion, as individuals who presented this high marker before the experiment indicated that they did not follow the rest protocol properly. This was excluded from the study. The integrated analysis performed by data mining using the Spearman test to find new correlations was presented with the heat map strategy in both experiments, indicating the future of research with HIIT and HIFT.