Assesses cerebral blood flow during orthostatic challenge in hEDS, indicating significant cerebral vasoconstriction.
Background Orthostatic intolerance is common in hypermobile Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (hEDS) with one third of patients fulfilling postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome criteria. Our aim was to assess cerebral blood flow in patients with hEDS and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome during orthostasis, which may be responsible for orthostatic intolerance. Methods In 18 individuals with hEDS and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome and 20 healthy controls, we conducted real‐time phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging of the middle cerebral artery with and without an orthostatic challenge through 30 mm Hg lower‐body negative pressure. Results During lower‐body negative pressure, heart rate increased more in hEDS than in controls (15.0±8.3 bpm versus 7.8±7.7 bpm, P =0.009); blood pressure remained unchanged; middle cerebral artery flow per heartbeat decreased more in hEDS (−28%±16% versus −15%±13% in controls, P =0.013) with decreased mean volumetric flow in hEDS (−12%±17%, P <0.001 versus −6%±8% in controls, P =0.102); average middle cerebral artery peak blood flow velocity decreased in both groups (hEDS: 44.6±8.1 cm/s to 37.6±8.4 cm/s, P <0.001; controls: 40.3±10.9 cm/s to 36.9±11.1 cm/s, P =0.018); respiration rate increased in hEDS (14.3±5.1/min to 17.4±5.3/min, P =0.002) leading to a decrease in end‐tidal CO 2 (39.2±4.2 mm Hg to 35.6±6.4 mm Hg, P =0.025), and cerebrovascular resistance increased more in hEDS (50.8%±48.4%, P <0.001) versus (20.3%±20.6%, P =0.005) in controls. Conclusions Individuals with hEDS and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome maintain cerebral perfusion primarily through tachycardic compensation during orthostatic stress despite hypocapnic vasoconstriction. Registration URL: https://drks.de/search/en ; Unique Identifier: DRKS00028279.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gerlach et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: