MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Elevated inspired and end‐tidal PCO2 on the International Space Station

2016· article· en· W2609162596 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Richard L. Hughson, Nicholas J. Yee, Danielle K. Greaves

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordspCO2SpaceflightInternational Space StationMedicineCardiologyAnesthesiaAeronauticsEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vision impairment intracranial pressure syndrome (VIIP) has recently been identified in astronauts living in space for long durations on the International Space Station (ISS). Although changes in hydrostatic pressure gradient resulting in chronic increases in cerebral artery and intracranial pressure are regarded as the most likely causes of VIIP, the elevated PCO2 in the atmosphere of the ISS is considered a potential contributor due to the vasodilatory effect of CO2 on cerebral and retinal arterioles. To date, there are no data published on the impact of elevated inspired PCO2 on arterial PCO2 during spaceflight. In the BP Reg study, we measured cardiac output by rebreathing providing an opportunity to obtain several breaths prior to rebreathing in which we could monitor inspired and expired PCO2. Here we report the averages from pre‐rebreathing PCO2 from inspiration and end‐tidal values (as indicators of the arterial PCO2) from 9 male astronauts during maneuvers in pre‐flight upright seated baseline testing and during spaceflight approximately 3 weeks before return to Earth. For each individual, all suitable breaths were averaged to a single value. Inspired PCO2 increased from pre‐flight baseline (0.6±0.12 mmHg) to inflight (3.8±0.44 mmHg, P<0.001). Expired, end‐tidal, PCO2 also increased from pre‐flight baseline (36.0±3.22 mmHg) to inflight (42.1±3.70 mmHg, P=0.004). The difference between end‐tidal PCO2 comparing inflight to pre‐flight (6.1±1.62 mmHg) was greater than the difference between inspired PCO2 comparing pre‐flight to inflight (3.3±0.46 mmHg, P<0.001). These data show that inspired PCO2 is elevated during spaceflight, but rather than an anticipated increase in alveolar ventilation to compensate for this increase in inspired PCO2, there might have been a reduction in alveolar ventilation resulting in an increase in end‐tidal PCO2 which is an indicator of arterial PCO2, although changes in ventilation‐perfusion should be considered. On Earth, a 6 mmHg increase in arterial PCO2 would be expected to increase brain blood flow over 15%; but, in spaceflight there appears to be no increase (Arbeille, 2001). Therefore, further studies are required to examine arterial PCO2 rather than end‐tidal, cerebrovascular reactivity to CO2 and cerebral blood flow to determine if elevated inspired PCO2 might contribute to the incidence of VIIP in astronauts. Support or Funding Information Supported by Canadian Space Agency

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207