Superficial venous vascular response of the resting limb during static exercise and postexercise muscle ischemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Superficial venous vascular response to exercise is mediated sympathetically, although the mechanism is not fully understood. We examined whether sympathetic activation via muscle metaboreflex plays a role in the control of a superficial vein in the contralateral resting limb during exercise. The experimental condition involved selective stimulation of muscle metaboreceptors: 12 subjects performed static handgrip exercises at 45% maximal voluntary contraction for 1.5 min followed by a recovery period with arterial occlusion of the exercise arm (OCCL). For the control condition (CONT), the same exercise protocol was performed except that the recovery period occurred without arterial occlusion. Heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) were measured. The cross-sectional area of the basilic superficial vein (CSAvein) and blood velocity (Vvein) in the resting upper arm were measured by ultrasound while the cuff on resting upper arm was inflated constantly to a subdiastolic pressure of 50 mm Hg. Basilic vein blood flow (BFvein) was calculated as CSAvein × Vvein. During exercise under both OCCL and CONT, HR and MAP increased (p < 0.05), while CSAvein decreased (p < 0.05). During recovery under OCCL, HR returned to baseline, but the exercise-induced increase in MAP and decrease in CSAvein were maintained (p < 0.05). During recovery under CONT, HR, MAP, and CSAvein returned to baseline. BFvein did not change during exercise or recovery under either condition. These results suggest that sympathoexcitation via muscle metaboreflex may be one of the factors responsible for exercise-induced constriction of the superficial veins per se in the resting limb.
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) | 0.001 | 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".