Key result
Greater cardiac baroreflex withdrawal (DownBRS > 1.0) was not associated with greater tolerance to reduced central blood volume compared to DownBRS < 1.0 (1849 vs 1839 sec).
Why the study?
Does greater cardiac baroreflex withdrawal (DownBRS > 1.0) associate with greater LBNP tolerance and higher HR, PVR, and SNA in subjects with high tolerance to progressive reductions in central blood volume?
Observational (n=116)
Does greater cardiac baroreflex withdrawal (DownBRS > 1.0) associate with greater LBNP tolerance and higher HR, PVR, and SNA in subjects with high tolerance to progressive reductions in central blood volume?
Absolute Event Rate: 1849% vs 1839%
Individual human physiological strategies to compensate for progressive reductions in central blood volume vary significantly, but the sum total of these strategies is accurately reflected by the compensatory reserve index.
Greater DownBRS withdrawal does not identify higher LBNP tolerance; leaves open baroreflex metrics as predictors of compensatory reserve in hypovolemia.
High tolerance to progressive reductions in central blood volume has been associated with higher heart rate (HR), peripheral vascular resistance (PVR), sympathetic nerve activity (SNA), and vagally mediated cardiac baroreflex sensitivity (BRS). Using a database of 116 subjects classified as high tolerance to presyncopal-limited lower body negative pressure (LBNP), we tested the hypothesis that subjects with greater cardiac baroreflex withdrawal (i.e., BRS > 1.0) would demonstrate greater LBNP tolerance associated with higher HR, PVR, and SNA. Subjects underwent LBNP to presyncope. Mean and diastolic arterial pressure (MAP; DAP) was measured by finger photoplethysmography and BRS (down sequence) was autocalculated (WinCPRS) as ∆R-R Interval/∆DAP. DownBRS : ms/mmHg) was used to dichotomize subjects into two groups (Group 1 = DownBRS > 1.0, N = 49, and Group 2 = DownBRS < 1.0, N = 67) at the time of presyncope. Muscle SNA was measured directly from the peroneal nerve via microneurography (N = 19) in subjects from Groups 1 (n = 9) and 2 (n = 10). Group 1 (DownBRS > 1.0) had lower HR (107 ± 19 vs. 131 ± 20 bpm), higher stroke volume (45 ± 15 vs. 36 ± 15 mL), less SNA (45 ± 13 vs. 53 ± 7 bursts/min), and less increase in PVR (4.1 ± 1.3 vs. 4.5 ± 2.6) compared to Group 2 (DownBRS < 1.0). Both groups had similar tolerance times (1849 ± 260 vs. 1839 ± 253 sec), MAP (78 ± 11 vs. 79 ± 12 mmHg), compensatory reserve index (CRI) (0.10 ± 0.03 vs. 0.09 ± 0.01), and cardiac output (4.5 ± 1.2 vs. 4.7 ± 1.1 L/min) at presyncope. Contrary to our hypothesis, higher HR, PVR, SNA, and BRS were not associated with greater tolerance to reduced central blood volume. These data are the first to demonstrate the variability and uniqueness of individual human physiological strategies designed to compensate for progressive reductions in central blood volume. The sum total of these integrated strategies is accurately reflected by the measurement of the compensatory reserve.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carter et al. (2016) conducted an observational in High tolerance to progressive reductions in central blood volume (n=116). Greater cardiac baroreflex withdrawal (DownBRS > 1.0) vs. DownBRS < 1.0 was evaluated on Tolerance time to presyncope (sec). Greater cardiac baroreflex withdrawal (DownBRS > 1.0) was not associated with greater tolerance to reduced central blood volume compared to DownBRS < 1.0 (1849 vs 1839 sec).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: