The dynamic gain of the carotid sinus baroreflex at 0.001 Hz tended to be greater than at 0.01 Hz (1.060 vs 0.625, p=0.080), and a second-order Uryson model better predicted arterial pressure.
In a rat model, baroreflex control of arterial pressure is largely maintained at very low frequencies (0.001 Hz), and nonlinear Uryson models better predict arterial pressure responses than linear models.
Absolute Event Rate: 1.06% vs 0.625%
p-value: p=0.080
Abstract Since the arterial baroreflex system is classified as an immediate control system, the focus has been on analyzing its dynamic characteristics in the frequency range between 0.01 and 1 Hz. Although the dynamic characteristics in the frequency range below 0.01 Hz are not expected to be large, actual experimental data are scant. The aim was to identify the dynamic characteristics of the carotid sinus baroreflex in the frequency range down to 0.001 Hz. The carotid sinus baroreceptor regions were isolated from the systemic circulation, and carotid sinus pressure (CSP) was changed every 10 s according to Gaussian white noise with a mean of 120 mmHg and standard deviation of 20 mmHg for 90 min in anesthetized Wistar‐Kyoto rats ( n = 8). The dynamic gain of the linear transfer function relating CSP to arterial pressure (AP) at 0.001 Hz tended to be greater than that at 0.01 Hz (1.060 ± 0.197 vs. 0.625 ± 0.067, p = 0.080), suggesting that baroreflex control was largely maintained at 0.001 Hz. Regarding nonlinear analysis, a second‐order Uryson model predicted AP with a higher R 2 value (0.645 ± 0.053) than a linear model ( R 2 = 0.543 ± 0.057, p = 0.025) or a second‐order Volterra model ( R 2 = 0.589 ± 0.055, p = 0.045) in testing data. These pieces of information may be used to create baroreflex models that can add a component of autonomic control to a cardiovascular digital twin for predicting acute hemodynamic responses to treatments and tailoring individual treatment strategies.
Kawada et al. (2022) studied this question. Gaussian white noise carotid sinus pressure perturbation vs. 0.01 Hz frequency (within-subject comparison) was evaluated on Dynamic gain of the linear transfer function relating carotid sinus pressure to arterial pressure at 0.001 Hz vs 0.01 Hz (p=0.080). The dynamic gain of the carotid sinus baroreflex at 0.001 Hz tended to be greater than at 0.01 Hz (1.060 vs 0.625, p=0.080), and a second-order Uryson model better predicted arterial pressure.