Peripheral vascular responses during carotid baroreceptor stimulation in normotensive and hypertensive subjects

Duprez, Daniel; Pue, N. De; Clément, Denis

doi:10.1042/cs0730635

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the differences in protocols and narrower ranges of stimuli make direct comparisons with our study difficult. The results of our study contrast with the work of Duprez et al (1987) who reported that blood flow in the finger reduced significantly with neck suction, and Ernsting and Parry (1957) who noted a reduction in FBF with reduced pressure around the neck, but did not report the magnitude of this change. Lindblad et al (1982) showed changes in forearm vascular resistance (FVR) but it is difficult to assess the extent of the changes in FBF from their report.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 86%

“…However, others have reported reflex changes in peripheral vascular resistance or blood flow during stimulation of carotid sinus baroreceptors (Wallin et al 1975;Lindblad et al 1982;Ebert 1983;Victor and Mark 1985;Duprez et al 1987). Also, some workers have demonstrated an increase in the sensitivity of the carotid sinus baroreflex with reductions in CVP (Victor and Mark 1985;Pawelczyk and Raven 1989;Potts et al 1995) and a reduction in carotid sinus baroreflex sensitivity upon increases in CVP (Shi et al 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…The majority of studies have used one or two stages of neck suction without application of neck pressure (Bevega˚rd et al 1977;Abboud et al 1979;Escourrou et al 1993). Those reports that have used a single or limited range of neck suction have shown increases (Lindblad et al 1982), decreases (Duprez et al 1987), and no change (Bevega˚rd et al 1977;Thompson et al 1991;Escourrou et al 1993) in forearm or digital blood flow. Lindblad et al (1982) used a 6-s ramp of neck suction from )10 to )40 mmHg, whereas Victor and Mark (1985) applied a single neck pressure stimulus in their investigation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A wide range of baroreflex stimulation does not alter forearm blood flow

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The contribution to the regulation of forearm blood flow (FBF) by different baroreceptor populations has previously only been studied over a limited range of stimuli. Therefore, FBF and R-R interval were recorded during neck suctions and neck pressures ranging from -60 to +40 mmHg. The change in R-R interval (DeltaR-R) during neck suction was significantly increased at each stage when compared to the control ( P<0.05). DeltaR-R did not show any significant change during any of the neck pressure stages ( P>0.05). Suction or pressure applied to the neck did not elicit any significant changes in FBF when compared to the control ( P>0.05). These data show that widening the range of applied stimuli to carotid sinus baroreceptors does not induce a change in FBF. However, the small transient changes reported previously cannot be discounted.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A wide range of baroreflex stimulation does not alter forearm blood flow

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Throughout each study period (about 12 min), the occlusion cuff placed on the ankle was kept inflated at supersystolic pressure (Ͼ240 mmHg) to impede the foot circulation. The foot has a rich skin vasculature, including arteriovenous anastomoses, which can be affected by changes in the level of arousal (which might be induced by NP and NS in the present study), whereas CBR itself has been reported to have little effect on the circulation in the distal portions of the extremities (3,4). Thus circulatory arrest in the foot should highlight the primary LVC and LBF responses elicited by CBR.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 71%

Muscle metaboreflex modulates the arterial baroreflex dynamic effects on peripheral vascular conductance in humans

Ichinose¹,

Nishiyasu²

2005

American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

by the ultrasound Doppler method), leg vascular conductance (LVC), mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR)] in humans. In 12 healthy subjects (10 men and 2 women), who performed sustained 1-min handgrip exercise at 50% maximal voluntary contraction followed immediately by an imposed postexercise muscle ischemia (PEMI), 5-s periods of neck pressure (NP; 50 mmHg) or neck suction (NS; Ϫ60 mmHg) were used to evaluate carotid baroreflex function both at rest (Con) and during PEMI. First, the decreases in LVC and LBF and the augmentation of MAP elicited by NP were all greater during PEMI than in Con (⌬LVC, Ϫ1.2 Ϯ 0.2 vs. Ϫ1.9 Ϯ 0.2 ml ⅐ min Ϫ1 ⅐ mmHg Ϫ1 ; ⌬LBF, Ϫ97.3 Ϯ 11.2 vs. Ϫ177.0 Ϯ 21.8 ml/min; ⌬MAP, 6.7 Ϯ 1.2 vs. 11.5 Ϯ 1.4 mmHg, Con vs. PEMI; each P Ͻ 0.05). Second, in Con, NS significantly increased both LVC and LBF (⌬LVC, 0.9 Ϯ 0.2 ml ⅐ min Ϫ1 ⅐ mmHg Ϫ1 ; ⌬LBF, 46.6 Ϯ 9.8 ml/min; significant change from baseline: each P Ͻ 0.05), and, whereas during PEMI no significant increases in LVC and LBF occurred during NS itself (⌬LVC, 0.2 Ϯ 0.1 ml ⅐ min Ϫ1 ⅐ mmHg Ϫ1 ; ⌬LBF, 10.8 Ϯ 9.6 ml/min; each P Ͼ 0.05), a decrease was evident in each parameters at 5 s after the cessation of NS. Third, during PEMI, the decrease in MAP elicited by NS was smaller (⌬MAP, Ϫ8.4 Ϯ 1.0 vs. Ϫ5.8 Ϯ 0.4 mmHg, Con vs. PEMI; P Ͻ 0.05), and it recovered to its initial level more quickly after NS (vs. Con). Finally, however, the HR responses to NS and NP were not different between PEMI and Con. These results suggest that during muscle metaboreflex activation in humans, the arterial baroreflex dynamic effect on peripheral vascular conductance is modulated, as exemplified by 1) an augmentation of the NP-induced LVC decrease, and 2) a loss of the NS-induced LVC increase. skeletal muscle metaboreflex; carotid baroreflex; exercise DURING HEAVY EXERCISE, the arterial baroreflexes and the reflexes evoked by activation of those afferent nerve endings in the working skeletal muscles that are sensitive to metabolic changes (the so-called muscle metaboreflex) are hypothesized to be activated and, moreover, to interact in ways that lead to modulation of the primary cardiovascular reflex responses (6 -9, 15, 19, 20, 24, 25, 29, 31). Two types of interaction between these reflexes have been demonstrated to lead to such modulation. In the first type, the arterial baroreflexes act to oppose the pressor response elicited via the muscle metaboreflex (15,19,29,31). Evidence for this effect has been obtained during dynamic exercise in dogs (31) as well as during static handgrip exercise (29) and postexercise muscle ischemia (PEMI) in humans (15). The second type of interaction involves a modulation of arterial baroreflex function during muscle metaboreflex activation (6 -9, 20). However, these interactions (especially the second: viz. modulation of arterial baroreflex function by the muscle metaboreflex) and their consequences are not fully understood.Papelier et al. (20) found that during PEMI-induced muscle metaboreflex activation, the carotid sin...

show abstract

“…However, the results of such investigations have been equivocal. Increases (Lindblad et al 1982), decreases (Ernsting & Parry, 1957;Duprez et al 1987;Ebert, 1982), or no change (Bevegard et al 1977;Escourrou et al 1993) in forearm blood flow or forearm vascular resistance have been reported during carotid sinus baroreceptor stimulation. The present study assessed forearm blood flow responses to a wide range of positive and negative pressures applied to the carotid sinus regions of the neck.…”

Section: School Of Biosciences University Of East London Romford Romentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Physiology

2002

The Journal of Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well known that periods of contractile activity result in adaptations to muscle structure and function. Clearly, this type of muscle remodelling must involve changes in the rate of muscle protein turnover. One of the major pathways for muscle protein turnover is the calpain proteolytic system (Goll et al. 1998), which comprises several calpain isoenzymes and their specific endogenous inhibitor calpastatin. The calpain system is believed to be responsible for cytoskeletal remodelling in muscle fibres and is also associated with myoblast differentiation and fusion, fibre hypertrophy and growth. However, in human skeletal muscle little is known about the effects of exercise on the calpain system, and how this relates to changes in muscle composition and function.Five female subjects (age 28 ± 2 years, body mass 69.0 ± 3.9 kg, height 1.69 ± 0.02 m) volunteered to participate in the study, which was approved by the local ethics committee. Supervised resistance training was performed on three occasions each week for a period of 8 weeks, followed by 4 weeks of detraining, where subjects were asked not to perform any strenuous activities. Needle muscle biopsies were obtained from the vastus lateralis (Bergstom, 1962) prior to training, following 8 weeks of training and after 4 weeks of detraining, and immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen. Total RNA was extracted from between 10 and 20 mg tissue, and the expression of calpastatin, m-and m-calpain and the muscle-specific p94-calpain determined by Taqman realtime PCR.Calpastatin expression was significantly increased by 300 % following 8 weeks of training and remained upregulated 4 weeks after the cessation of training (P < 0.05). This was mirrored by m-calpain expression, which increased 154 % (P < 0.01) following training and remained elevated after training was terminated (P < 0.01). Training had no effect on either p94 or m-calpain expression, but both were significantly increased after 4 weeks of detraining (Table 1). Training induced significant increases in resistance workload. Four weeks of training produced a change in resistance from week 0 of 9 ± 2 kg for leg squat (P < 0.05) and 9 ± 1 kg for leg rowing (P < 0.05) exercises. These changes were magnified after 8 weeks of training: 20 ± 4 kg for leg squat (P < 0.05) and 14 ± 2 kg for leg rowing (P < 0.05) in addition to a resistance change of 19 ± 3 kg for leg press exercises (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the data show that resistance training markedly increases the expression of m-calpain protease and to an even greater extent the calpain inhibitor, calpastatin. Furthermore, after detraining, m-calpain and calpastatin remained elevated, in addition to a significant upregulation of both muscle-specific p94 calpain and m-calpain protease. The implication of this induction of the calpain proteolytic system to muscle mass and fibre type is yet to be elucidated. Bergstrom, J. (1962 The effects of the menopause and hormone replacement therapy on small artery contractility are poorly understood. In this study we i...

show abstract

Peripheral vascular responses during carotid baroreceptor stimulation in normotensive and hypertensive subjects

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

A wide range of baroreflex stimulation does not alter forearm blood flow

A wide range of baroreflex stimulation does not alter forearm blood flow

Muscle metaboreflex modulates the arterial baroreflex dynamic effects on peripheral vascular conductance in humans

Human Physiology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About