Evidence for Pressure‐Independent Sympathetic Modulation of Central Pulse Wave Velocity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Whether the sympathetic nervous system can directly alter central aortic stiffness remains controversial, mainly because of the difficulty in experimentally augmenting peripheral vasoconstrictor activity without changing blood pressure. Methods and Results To address this limitation, we utilized low‐level cardiopulmonary baroreflex loading and unloading shown previously to alter sympathetic outflow without evoking parallel hemodynamic modulation. Blood pressure and carotid‐femoral aortic pulse wave velocity (cf‐ PWV ) were measured in 32 healthy participants (24±2 years; women: n=15) before and during 12‐minute applications of low‐level lower body negative pressure; −7 mm Hg) and lower body positive pressure; +7 mm Hg), applied in a random order. Fibular nerve microneurography was used to collect muscle sympathetic nerve activity ( MSNA ) in a subset (n=8) to confirm peripheral sympathetic responses. During lower body negative pressure, heart rate, blood pressure, stroke volume, cardiac output, and total peripheral resistance were not statistically different (all P >0.05); MSNA burst frequency (+15%; P =0.007), total MSNA (+44%; P =0.006), and cf‐ PWV (∆+0.3±0.2 m/s; P <0.001) increased. In total, 28 (88%) of participants observed an increase in cf‐ PWV greater than the baseline typical error of measurement. During lower body positive pressure, heart rate, stroke volume, cardiac output, and total peripheral resistance were not statistically different (all P >0.05), though blood pressure increased ( P <0.05) and pulse pressure decreased ( P =0.01); MSNA burst frequency (−4%; P =0.37), total MSNA (−7%; P =0.89), and cf‐ PWV (∆0.0±0.2 m/s; P =0.68) were not statistically different. Conclusions These findings provide evidence that acute elevations in peripheral sympathetic activity can increase central aortic PWV in young participants independent of a change in distending or pulsatile blood pressure or heart rate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".