PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 1, 1984Circulation259 citations

Selective impairment of baroreflex-mediated vasoconstrictor responses in patients with ventricular dysfunction.

View Full Paper
DFDavid W. FergusonFAFrançois M. AbboudAMAllyn L. Mark

Key Result

Patients with left ventricular dysfunction exhibited impaired forearm vasoconstrictor responses to lower body negative pressure compared to normal controls (-10.3 vs +16.6 U; p<0.001), which improved after digitalis administration.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=28)

Structured PICO

Does left ventricular dysfunction impair baroreflex-mediated vasoconstriction, and does acute digitalis administration restore it?

P
Population
11 patients with left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) (mean NYHA class 2.8, mean LVEF 18%) and 17 normal control subjects.
I
Intervention
Lower body negative pressure (LBNP) at -10 and -40 mm Hg to simulate orthostatic stress; and acute administration of a digitalis glycoside (ouabain 0.0075 mg/kg or lanatoside C 0.02 mg/kg) in LVD patients.
C
Comparator
Normal control subjects (for LBNP response) and pre-drug baseline (for digitalis response).
O
Outcome
Forearm vasoconstrictor responses (change in forearm vascular resistance) to simulated orthostatic stress using lower body negative pressure (LBNP).surrogate

Patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction exhibit impaired baroreflex-mediated vasoconstriction, which can be acutely improved by digitalis glycosides.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: -10.3% vs 16.6%

p-value: p=<0.001

Abstract

Cardiac dysfunction in animals has been associated with impairment of arterial and cardiopulmonary baroreflex control of the circulation. Chronic heart failure in human beings is associated with neurohumoral excitation, which could result in part from impairment in the inhibitory influence of baroreflexes. We postulated that (1) patients with left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) have impaired baroreflex modulation of vascular resistance and (2) administration of a digitalis glycoside would immediately restore baroreflex sensitivity. Eleven patients with LVD (NYHA class, 2.8 +/- 0.2, mean +/- SEM; baseline left ventricular ejection fraction, 18 +/- 2%; cardiac index, 2.4 +/- 0.21/min/m2; and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, 26.0 +/- 3.2 mm Hg) were compared with 17 normal control subjects. We measured forearm vasoconstrictor responses to simulated orthostatic stress with use of lower body negative pressure (LBNP) at -10 and -40 mm Hg to unload cardiopulmonary and arterial baroreceptors. Baseline forearm vascular resistance (FVR) was higher in patients with LVD than in normal subjects: FVRLVD, 68.8 +/- 15.3 U; FVRN, 23.2 +/- 2.1 U (p less than .001). During unloading of baroreceptors with LBNP -10 mm Hg, normal subjects developed vasoconstriction (delta VRN at LBNP -10 mm Hg, +5.7 +/- 1.6 U) but patients with LVD failed to have vasoconstriction and tended to develop vasodilation (delta FVRLVD at LBNP -10 mm Hg, -8.6 +/- 8.5 U) (p = .05, normals vs patients with LVD at LBNP -10 mm Hg). A more marked disparity in response was seen during unloading of baroreceptors of LBNP -40 mm Hg: delta FVRN at LBNP -40 mm Hg, +16.6 +/- 1.5 U; delta FVRLVD at LBNP -40 mm Hg, -10.3 +/- 9.6 U (p less than .001, normals vs patients with LVD). Despite high baseline values for FVR, patients with LVD developed vasoconstriction during intra-arterial infusions of norepinephrine, thereby excluding a nonspecific depression of vascular reactivity as the mechanism for abnormal responses to LBNP in patients with LVD. We also studied the short-term effects of administration of a digitalis glycoside, ouabain 0.0075 mg/kg (seven patients) or lanatoside C (Cedilanid-D) 0.02 mg/kg (three patients), on baroreflex-mediated vasoconstrictor responses to LBNP in the patients with LVD. Digitalis glycoside reduced baseline FVR from 71.8 +/- 16.6 to 48.6 +/- 12.0 U (p less than .02). Responses to LBNP tended to be normalized after administration of digitalis glycoside: delta FVR during LBNP -40 mm Hg, -11.1 +/- 10.5 U before and +7.8 +/- 5.6 U after the drug (p less than .05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ferguson et al. (1984) conducted an observational in Left ventricular dysfunction (n=28). Digitalis glycoside (ouabain or lanatoside C) vs. Normal control subjects / Baseline was evaluated on Change in forearm vascular resistance (delta FVR) during lower body negative pressure at -40 mm Hg (p=<0.001). Patients with left ventricular dysfunction exhibited impaired forearm vasoconstrictor responses to lower body negative pressure compared to normal controls (-10.3 vs +16.6 U; p<0.001), which improved after digitalis administration.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a07b50f44ff8ad339f69d35https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.69.3.451
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The role of low pressure baroreceptors in reflex vasoconstrictor responses in man1972 · 321 citations
  2. 2Peripheral Venoconstriction in Human Congestive Heart Failure1956 · 96 citations
  3. 3Augmentation of the Plasma Nor-Epinephrine Response to Exercise in Patients with Congestive Heart Failure1962 · 440 citations
  4. 4Characteristics of left ventricular receptors with nonmedullated vagal afferents in cats.1977 · 155 citations
  5. 5Reflex Cardiovascular Effects of Epicardial Stimulation by Acetylstrophanthidin in Dogs1969 · 51 citations