Peripheral chemoreceptor control of cardiovascular function at rest and during exercise in heart failure patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peripheral chemoreceptor activity/sensitivity is enhanced in chronic heart failure (HF), and sensitivity is linked to greater mortality. This study aimed to determine the role of the peripheral chemoreceptor in cardiovascular control at rest and during exercise in HF patients and controls. Clinically stable HF patients (n = 11; ejection fraction: 39 ± 5%) and risk-matched controls (n = 10; ejection fraction: 65 ± 2%) performed randomized trials with or without dopamine infusion (2 μg·min(-1)·kg(-1)) at rest and during 40% maximal voluntary contraction handgrip (HG) exercise, and a resting trial of 2 min of inspired 100% oxygen. Both dopamine and hyperoxia were used to inhibit the peripheral chemoreceptor. At rest in HF patients, dopamine decreased ventilation (P = 0.02), decreased total peripheral resistance index (P = 0.003), and increased cardiac and stroke indexes (P ≤ 0.01), yet there was no effect of dopamine on these variables in controls (P ≥ 0.7). Hyperoxia lowered ventilation in HF (P = 0.01), but not in controls (P = 0.9), indicating suppression of the peripheral chemoreceptors in HF. However, no decrease of total peripheral resistance index was observed in HF. As expected, HG increased heart rate, ventilation, and brachial conductance of the nonexercising arm in controls and HF patients. During dopamine infusion, there were no changes in mean arterial pressure, heart rate, or ventilation responses to HG in either group (P ≥ 0.26); however, brachial conductance increased with dopamine in the control group (P = 0.004), but decreased in HF (P = 0.02). Our findings indicate that the peripheral chemoreceptor contributes to cardiovascular control at rest in HF patients and during exercise in risk-matched controls.
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) | 0.001 | 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".