MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Normal sympathetic neural but blunted cardiovascular responses during static handgrip exercise in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

2023· article· en· W4378648710 on OpenAlexaff
Takuro Washio, Ryosuke Takeda, Sarah L. Hissen, John D. Akins, Andrew W. D’Souza, Kazumasa Manabe, Christopher M. Hearon, James P. MacNamara, Satyam Sarma, Benjamin D. Levine, Paul J. Fadel, Qi Fu

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and exercise physiology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroneurographyMedicineCardiologyHeart failureInternal medicineSupine positionHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionBlood pressureHeart rateEjection fractionDiastoleExercise intoleranceBaroreflex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Exercise intolerance is a hallmark of heart failure, which significantly impacts activities of daily living and quality of life. In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, exercise intolerance is associated with sympathetic nervous system hyperactivity during exercise. Whether this is also true in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is unknown. Therefore, we hypothesized that patients with HFpEF would have augmented sympathetic neural responses to exercise. Methods: Thirty-four patients with HFpEF (19 women, 70±7 [SD] yrs) and 24 age-matched healthy controls (14 women, 70±6 yrs) were studied. Mean arterial pressure (MAP; finger photoplethysmography calibrated with brachial blood pressure [BP]), heart rate (HR; lead II electrocardiogram), cardiac output (CO; derived from the Windkessel model), total peripheral resistance (TPR=MAP/CO), and muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA, microneurography) were measured during 3 min of supine baseline, static handgrip (SHG) exercise at 40% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force until fatigue, and 2 min of post-exercise circulatory arrest (PECA). Sympathetic transduction was estimated using diastolic BP divided by MSNA burst incidence. Results: Patients with HFpEF had a smaller MVC (24±8 vs. 30±9 kg, P=0.020) and a shorter time to fatigue during SHG (162±67 vs. 210±80 sec, P=0.012) than controls. However, there were consistent results across subgroups analyzed according to matched MVC or time to fatigue during SHG. Baseline MSNA burst frequency was higher in HFpEF patients compared with controls (36±16 vs. 24±13 bursts/min, P=0.005); however, there were no differences in MSNA responses (Δ) to SHG and PECA between the groups (SHG peak: 19±14 in HFpEF vs. 19±12 bursts/min in controls, P=0.984; PECA: 8±13 vs. 6±7 bursts/minute, P=0.596). Increases in MAP, HR, and TPR from baseline to peak SHG were smaller in patients with HFpEF than in controls (all P<0.05), while the increase in CO was not different between the groups ( P=0.101). In contrast, ΔMAP, ΔHR and ΔCO from baseline to PECA were not different between the groups (all P>0.05), but ΔTPR remained lower in patients with HFpEF than controls ( P=0.023). The transduction of MSNA burst incidence into diastolic BP was lower in patients with HFpEF compared with controls throughout data collection ( P=0.010). Conclusions: Contrary to our hypothesis, patients with HFpEF have normal sympathetic neural reactivity during SHG exercise despite a higher baseline. The blunted pressor response may be attributed to impaired sympathetic transduction to stress rather than a change in sympathetic neural responsiveness during exercise in HFpEF. Supported by the National Institutes of Health (P01HL137630 and R01HL091078) This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2023 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.

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 score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiologySame topicCardiovascular and exercise physiologyFrench-language works237,207