Key result
Continuous electrical stimulation of the aortic depressor nerve reduced arterial pressure more effectively than intermittent stimulation over 60 minutes, but neither elicited sustained bradycardia.
Why the study?
Does continuous versus intermittent electrical stimulation of the aortic depressor nerve elicit different hemodynamic responses in conscious rats?
RCT (n=16)
randomly assigned
Does continuous versus intermittent electrical stimulation of the aortic depressor nerve elicit different hemodynamic responses in conscious rats?
Continuous electrical stimulation of the aortic depressor nerve is more effective than intermittent stimulation in reducing arterial pressure over a 60-minute period in conscious rats.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Continuous ADN stimulation may sustain BP reduction better in rats; leaves open translation to clinical baroreflex therapies.
AIMS: Short-term (seconds or minutes) continuous electrical activation of the aortic depressor nerve (ADN) in conscious rats has been successfully used to investigate baroafferent function in experimental hypertension, heart failure, and peripheral inflammation. The aim of this study was to characterize the hemodynamic responses elicited by longer periods (60min) of continuous or intermittent electrical baroreflex activation. MAIN METHODS: Wistar rats were implanted with an electrode around the left ADN and a catheter into a femoral artery. The systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure and heart rate were recorded in subjects randomly assigned to continuous or intermittent electrical stimulation. The time-course of cardiovascular responses in conscious rats was examined during longer-term (60min) continuous (n=6) or intermittent (5s ON/3s OFF; n=10) electrical stimulation (0.5mA; 0.25ms; 30Hz) of the ADN. KEY FINDINGS: The prompt (20s) hypotensive response was greater under continuous stimulation, but no difference was detected in the bradycardic response. The hypotensive response was sustained only by continuous stimulation while no sustained bradycardia was observed in either protocol. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings indicate that continuous stimulation of the ADN is more effective in reducing arterial pressure over a longer period (60min) of stimulation. Nevertheless, both protocols - continuous or intermittent - were unable to elicit a sustained bradycardia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brognara et al. (2016) reported an RCT. Continuous electrical stimulation of the aortic depressor nerve vs. Intermittent electrical stimulation was evaluated on Hemodynamic responses (arterial pressure and heart rate). Continuous electrical stimulation of the aortic depressor nerve reduced arterial pressure more effectively than intermittent stimulation over 60 minutes, but neither elicited sustained bradycardia.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: