MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effects of CO <sub>2</sub> on Regional Cerebral Blood Flow Regulation During Lower‐Body Negative Pressure

2019· article· en· W3176914191 on OpenAlexafffund
Chantelle Green, Kristi I. Wynnyk, R Brandt, Trevor A. Day

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNormocapniaHypocapniaCerebral blood flowHypercapniaTranscranial DopplerMean arterial pressureAnesthesiaHyperventilationMedicineBlood pressureHeart rateMiddle cerebral arteryCardiologyPosterior cerebral arteryCerebral autoregulationHemodynamicsInternal medicineAutoregulationIschemiaAcidosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebrovascular CO 2 reactivity (CVR) is differentially regulated between anterior and posterior cerebral circulations, where the cerebrovasculature is responsive to increases (dilation) or decreases (constriction) in arterial CO 2 . In addition, anterior and posterior cerebral blood flow (CBF) may be differentially regulated during lower body negative pressure (LNBP), where blood volume distribution is experimentally moved toward the lower extremities, imposing an acute hypovolemic and hypotensive challenge. However, the effects of steady‐state increases and decreases in CO 2 on the CBF response to LBNP‐imposed hypotension has not been investigated systematically. The aim of this study was to investigate regional CBF responses to incremental (i.e., ramp) LBNP in steady‐state hypo‐ and hypercapnia in anterior and posterior cerebral circulations. We hypothesized that posterior CBF would be better maintained during LBNP at all levels of CO 2 and that regional patterns of CBF regulation during LBNP would be unchanged by steady‐state CO 2 perturbations. In 14 healthy participants, we measured cardiovascular and cerebrovascular variables, including heart rate (HR; ECG), mean arterial pressure (MAP; finometry), and using transcranial Doppler ultrasound, cerebral blood velocity (CBV) and cerebrovascular conductance (CVC; CBV/MAP) in the middle (MCA) and posterior cerebral artery (PCA). We carried out three separate incremental LBNP protocols (−20, −40, −60 and −80 mm Hg; 3‐min each) at three randomized steady‐state levels of CO 2 : (a) hypocapnia (−8 mm Hg; i.e., coached hyperventilation), (b) normocapnia (i.e., room air), and (c) hypercapnia (+8 mm Hg; 5% inspired CO 2 ). We found that HR increased incrementally with LBNP in all CO 2 conditions (P<0.001). At −80mmHg LBNP, MAP decreased in hypo‐ (P=0.046) and normocapnia (P=0.002). MCA CBV decreased in normo‐ (P<0.001) and hypercapnia (P<0.001). PCA CBV also decreased in normo‐ (P=0.011) and hypercapnia (P=0.002). However, MCA CVC decreased in normo‐ (P=0.01) and hypercapnia (P<0.001), whereas PCA CVC did not decrease during LBNP at all levels of CO 2 . These findings demonstrate greater sensitivity in anterior cerebral circulation compared to posterior during a moderate LBNP challenge with alterations in CO 2 . Our data elucidate a comprehensive understanding of regional CVR during LBNP‐induced hypovolemia, and may be applied to understanding preferential protection of posterior brain structures during hypovolemic shock. Support or Funding Information NSERC Discovery and MRU Faculty of Science and Technology This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances→French-language works237,207→