MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992206186 · doi:10.1113/jp278941

Acute intermittent hypercapnic hypoxia and sympathetic neurovascular transduction in men

2019· article· en· W2992206186 on OpenAlexafffund
Troy J.R. Stuckless, Tyler D. Vermeulen, Courtney V. Brown, Lindsey M. Boulet, Brooke M. Shafer, Denis J. Wakeham, Craig D. Steinback, Najib Ayas, John S. Floras, Glen E. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanada Foundation for InnovationMichael Smith Health Research BCNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsHypoxia (environmental)Neurovascular bundleMedicineTransduction (biophysics)CardiologyHypercapniaNeuroscienceInternal medicineAnesthesiaAnatomyBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key points Intermittent hypoxia leads to long‐lasting increases in muscle sympathetic nerve activity and blood pressure, contributing to increased risk for hypertension in obstructive sleep apnoea patients. We determined whether augmented vascular responses to increasing sympathetic vasomotor outflow, termed sympathetic neurovascular transduction (sNVT), accompanied changes in blood pressure following acute intermittent hypercapnic hypoxia in men. Lower body negative pressure was utilized to induce a range of sympathetic vasoconstrictor firing while measuring beat‐by‐beat blood pressure and forearm vascular conductance. IH reduced vascular shear stress and steepened the relationship between diastolic blood pressure and sympathetic discharge frequency, suggesting greater systemic sNVT. Our results indicate that recurring cycles of acute intermittent hypercapnic hypoxia characteristic of obstructive sleep apnoea could promote hypertension by increasing sNVT. Abstract Acute intermittent hypercapnic hypoxia (IH) induces long‐lasting elevations in sympathetic vasomotor outflow and blood pressure in healthy humans. It is unknown whether IH alters sympathetic neurovascular transduction (sNVT), measured as the relationship between sympathetic vasomotor outflow and either forearm vascular conductance (FVC; regional sNVT) or diastolic blood pressure (systemic sNVT). We tested the hypothesis that IH augments sNVT by exposing healthy males to 40 consecutive 1 min breathing cycles, each comprising 40 s of hypercapnic hypoxia ( : +4 ± 3 mmHg above baseline; : 48 ± 3 mmHg) and 20 s of normoxia (n = 9), or a 40 min air‐breathing control (n = 7). Before and after the intervention, lower body negative pressure (LBNP; 3 min at –15, –30 and –45 mmHg) was applied to elicit reflex increases in muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA, fibular microneurography) when clamping end‐tidal gases at baseline levels. Ventilation, arterial pressure [systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure (MAP)], brachial artery blood flow ( BA), FVC ( BA/MAP) and MSNA burst frequency were measured continuously. Following IH, but not control, ventilation [5 L min–1; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1–9] and MAP (5 mmHg; 95% CI = 1–9) were increased, whereas FVC (–0.2 mL min–1 mmHg–1; 95% CI = –0.0 to –0.4) and mean shear rate (–21.9 s–1; 95% CI = –5.8 to –38.0; all P < 0.05) were reduced. Systemic sNVT was increased following IH (0.25 mmHg burst–1 min–1; 95% CI = 0.01–0.49; P < 0.05), whereas changes in regional forearm sNVT were similar between IH and sham. Reductions in vessel wall shear stress and, consequently, nitric oxide production may contribute to heightened systemic sNVT and provide a potential neurovascular mechanism for elevated blood pressure in obstructive sleep apnoea.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations50
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207