Lower limb-localized vascular phenomena explain initial orthostatic hypotension upon standing from squat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cause(s) of initial orthostatic hypotension (transient fall in blood pressure within 15 s upon active rising) have not been established. We tested the hypothesis that this hypotension is due to local vascular phenomena in contracting leg muscles from the brief effort of standing up. Seventeen young healthy subjects (2 male and 15 female, 22.5 ± 1.0 years) performed an active rise from resting squat after a 10-s squat, a 1-min squat, or a 5-min squat. Beat-by-beat arterial blood pressure, cardiac output, heart rate, and stroke volume (Finometer finger photoplethysmography) and right common femoral artery blood flow (Doppler and Echo ultrasound) were recorded. Data are means ± SE. Quiet standing before squat represented baseline. Peak increases in lower limb and total vascular conductance (ml·min(-1)·mmHg(-1)) upon standing were not different within squat conditions (10-s squat, 50.0 ± 12.4 vs. 44.3 ± 5.0; 1-min squat, 54.7 ± 9.2 vs. 50.5 ± 4.5; 5-min squat, 67.4 ± 13.7 vs. 58.8 ± 3.9; all P > 0.574). Mean arterial blood pressure (in mmHg) fell to a nadir well below standing baseline in all conditions despite increases in cardiac output. The hypotension predicted by the increase in leg vascular conductance accounted for this hypotension [observed vs. predicted (in mmHg): 10-s squat, -17.1 ± 2.1 vs. -18.3 ± 5.5; 1-min squat, -22.0 ± 3.8 vs. -25.3 ± 4.9; 5-min squat, -28.3 ± 4.0 vs. -29.2 ± 6.7]. We conclude that rapid contraction induced dilation in leg muscles with the effort of standing, along with a minor potential contribution of elevated lower limb arterio-venous pressure gradient, outstrips compensatory cardiac output responses and is the cause of initial orthostatic hypotension upon standing from squat.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".