MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Potentiation of GABAergic synaptic transmission by diazepam acutely increases resting beat‐to‐beat blood pressure variability in young adults

2022· article· en· W4225407802 on OpenAlexafffund
André L. Teixeira, Massimo Nardone, Milena Samora, Igor A. Fernandes, Plínio Santos Ramos, Jeann L. Sabino‐Carvalho, Djalma Rabelo Ricardo, Philip J. Millar, Lauro C. Vianna

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsBeat (acoustics)DiazepamLong-term potentiationBlood pressureGABAergicNeurotransmissionMedicineNeuroscienceAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychologyPhysicsInhibitory postsynaptic potentialAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Resting beat‐to‐beat blood pressure (BP) variability is a powerful predictor of cardiovascular events and end‐organ damage. Recent studies indicate that resting beat‐to‐beat BP variability possesses greater prognostic value when compared with traditional 24‐h ambulatory or home‐based BP monitoring. However, despite the well‐recognized clinical significance of resting beat‐to‐beat BP variability, its underlying mechanisms remain incompletely understood. The sympathetic nervous system is critical for BP regulation. Given that the sympathetic pre‐motor neurons are highly regulated by inhibitory GABAergic interneurons, it is reasonable to speculate that GABA receptors may contribute to the beat‐to‐beat BP variability. However, this hypothesis has not been tested experimentally before. Therefore, in this study, we tested the hypothesis that a potentiation of GABAergic synaptic transmission by diazepam would acutely increase resting beat‐to‐beat blood pressure variability in humans. Methods In 40 (17 females) young, normotensive adults, resting beat‐to‐beat BP (finger photoplethysmography) was continuously measured for 5‐10 min, 60 min after the oral administration of either diazepam (10 mg) or placebo. The experiments were conducted in a randomized, double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled and crossover design. Stroke volume was estimated from the BP waveform (ModelFlow) permitting the calculation of cardiac output (CO) and total peripheral resistance (TPR). Parameters of variability included the standard deviation, range, interquartile range (the difference between the 25th and 75th percentiles within‐subject), the coefficient of variation [(SD/mean) x 100], and the average real variability. Additionally, direct recordings of muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA, microneurography) were obtained in a subset of subjects (n=13) and the gain of arterial baroreflex control of MSNA (sympathetic baroreflex) and heart rate (cardiac baroreflex), as well as signal‐averaged sympathetic transduction of blood pressure calculated. Results Compared to placebo, diazepam significantly increased the standard deviation of systolic (4.7 ± 1.4 vs. 5.7 ± 1.5 mmHg, P = 0.001), diastolic (3.8 ± 1.2 vs. 4.5 ± 1.2 mmHg, P = 0.007) and mean BP (3.8 ± 1.1 vs. 4.5 ± 1.1 mmHg, P = 0.002), as well as CO (469 ± 149 vs. 626 ± 259 ml/min, P < 0.001) and TPR (1.0 ± 0.3 vs. 1.4 ± 0.6 mmHg/l/min, P < 0.001). Similar results were found using all indices of variability. Furthermore, diazepam reduced resting MSNA burst frequency (placebo: 22 ± 6 bursts/min vs. diazepam: 18 ± 8 bursts/min, P = 0.025) without affecting cardiac or sympathetic baroreflex sensitivity. However, the peak increase in mean BP following a spontaneous burst of MSNA (i.e., sympathetic transduction) was accentuated after diazepam administration. Conclusion This is the first study to indicate that GABA A receptors may play a role in resting beat‐to‐beat BP variability. These findings advance our current understanding of the neural network mechanisms contributing to the resting beat‐to‐beat BP variability in young adults.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207