4.2 Article

The compensatory responses to upper airway obstruction in normal subjects under propofol anesthesia

期刊

RESPIRATORY PHYSIOLOGY & NEUROBIOLOGY
卷 166, 期 1, 页码 24-31

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.resp.2009.01.001

关键词

Propofol anesthesia; Critical closing pressure; Inspiratory duty cycle; Upper airway; Obstructive sleep apnea

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [K23 HL077137, HL50381, HL 72126, R01 HL050381-15A1, R01 HL050381, HL077137, K23 HL072126] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Upper airway obstruction during sleep can trigger compensatory neuromuscular responses and/or prolong inspiration in order to maintain adequate minute ventilation. The aim of this study was to investigate the strength of these compensatory responses during upper airway obstruction during propofol anesthesia. We assessed respiratory timing and upper airway responses to decreases in nasal pressure in nine propofol anesthetized normal subjects under condition of decreased (passive) and increased (active) neuromuscular activity. Critical closing pressure (P-CRIT) and upstream resistance (R-US) were derived from pressure-flow relationships generated from each condition. The inspiratory duty cycle (IDC), maximum inspiratory flow((V) over tilde (1) max)and respiratory rate (f)were determined at two levels of mean inspiratory airflow ((V) over bar (1); mild airflow limitation with (V) over tilde (1) >= 150 ml s(-1); severe airflow limitation with (V) over bar (1) < 150 ml s(-1)). Compared to the passive condition, P-CRIT decreased significantly (5.3 +/- 3.8 cm H2O, p < 0.05) and R-US increased (7.4 cm H2O ml(-1) s, p < 0.05) in the active condition. The IDC increased progressively and comparably as <(V)over bar>(1) decreased in both the passive and active conditions (p < 0.05). These findings imply that distinct compensatory mechanisms govern the modulation of respiratory pattern and pharyngeal patency during periods of airway obstruction under propofol anesthesia. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据