Paradoxical Muscle Sympathetic Reflex Activation in Human Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Muscle sympathetic activation in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been attributed, on the basis of multiunit recordings, to attenuated inhibitory feedback from stretch-sensitive cardiopulmonary mechanoreceptors. However, such preparations integrate 2 populations of single units exhibiting directionally opposite firing when atrial pressure is perturbed. We tested the hypothesis that the proportion of single units firing paradoxically when filling pressure increases is augmented in HFrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Muscle sympathetic nerve activity and estimated central venous pressure were recorded during nonhypotensive lower body negative pressure (LBNP; -10 mm Hg) and nonhypertensive positive pressure (LBPP; +10 mm Hg) in 11 treated HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction 25 ± 6% [mean ± standard deviation]) patients and 14 similarly aged controls. Single-unit muscle sympathetic nerve activity discharge was termed either anticipated, if firing frequency exhibited classic negative-feedback responses, or paradoxical. LBNP and LBPP had no heart rate, stroke volume, or blood pressure effects (P>0.05). Estimated central venous pressure decreased with LBNP (P<0.05), increased with LBPP (P<0.05), and was consistently higher in HFrEF (P<0.05). During LBNP, the ratio of single units with anticipated and paradoxical discharge was similar in HFrEF (18:7) and controls (27:5), whereas LBPP elicited paradoxical reflex excitation in a greater proportion of HFrEF single units (7:18 versus 24:6; P=0.0001). Consequently, LBPP increased mean single-unit firing frequency (P<0.05) and did not inhibit multiunit muscle sympathetic nerve activity of HFrEF subjects (P<0.05 versus controls). Firing of 12/18 HFrEF (but no control) single units increased during both LBPP and LBNP. CONCLUSION: These findings provide the first evidence in human HFrEF for an augmented excitatory cardiopulmonary-muscle sympathetic nerve activity reflex response to increased preload, incorporating 2 distinct single-unit populations with differing firing properties.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".