4.7 Article

Baroreflex sensitivity in the elderly: influence of age, breathing and spectral methods

Journal

CLINICAL SCIENCE
Volume 99, Issue 5, Pages 371-381

Publisher

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/CS19990374

Keywords

aging; autonomic nervous system; baroreflex; reference values; reproducibility

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) has been proposed as a diagnostic parameter for neurological disorders and as a survival-prognosis parameter in diabetic and cardiac patients. Therefore reference values and the reproducibility of BRS were assessed, taking into account the possible influence of age, gender, test conditions and some analysis variants. Healthy subjects (n = 191) were randomly selected from the 50-75-year-old general population (the Hoorn Study). Variations in blood pressure and heart rate were recorded non-invasively during three breathing modes: spontaneous (3 min), slow metronome (1 min; 6 breaths/min = 0.1 Hz) and fast metronome (1 min; 15 breaths/min = 0.25 Hz), all in a supine position. From these recordings, BRS was assessed as the transfer gain between changes in blood pressure and heart period, and as the GI coefficient. BRS values ranged from 5.0 to 8.9 ms.mmHg(-1). Slow metronome breathing resulted in higher BRS values than fast breathing, while during spontaneous breathing BRS in the low-frequency band was lower than that in the high-frequency band (respiratory origin). BRS values decreased with lower coherence criteria. BRS-ce was significantly higher than BRS-gain. While regression analysis showed no gender differences, BRS decreased with age. Therefore age-specific reference values were calculated. The reproducibility of BRS values was in general moderate, with reliability coefficients ranging from 43 to 81% and coefficients of variation ranging from 34 to 59%. In conclusion, this study shows age, breathing mode, frequency and coherence threshold to affect measures of BRS. Therefore these factors should be considered in clinical studies; appropriate reference values are given.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available