4.7 Article

Effects of the Menstrual Cycle on Lung Function Variables in Women with Asthma

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200904-0497OC

关键词

gas transfer; angiogenesis; asthma; menstrual cycle; proangiogenic progenitor cell

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL081064, HL69170, HI-60917, A170649, M01 RR018390]
  2. Cleveland Clinic Research Programs Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: Anglogenesis is a defining pathologic feature of airway remodeling and contributes to asthma severity. Women experience changes in asthma control over the menstrual cycle, a time when vessels routinely form and regress under the control of angiogenic factors. One vital function modulated over the menstrual cycle in healthy women is gas transfer, and this has been related to angiogenesis and cyclic expansion of the pulmonary vascular bed. Objectives: We hypothesized that changes in gas transfer and the pulmonary vascular bed occur in women with asthma over the menstrual cycle and are associated with worsening airflow obstruction. Methods: Twenty-three women, 13 with asthma and 10 healthy control subjects, were evaluated over the menstrual cycle with weekly measures of spirometry, gas transfer, nitric oxide, hemoglobin, factors affecting hemoglobin binding affinity, and proangiogenic factors. Measurements and Main Results: Airflow and lung diffusing capacity varied over the menstrual cycle with peak levels during menses that subsequently declined to nadir in early luteal phase. In contrast to healthy women, changes in lung diffusing capacity (DLCO) were associated with changes in membrane diffusing capacity and DLCO was not related to proangiogenic factors. DLCO did not differ between the two groups, although methemoglobin and carboxyhemoglobin were higher in women with asthma than in healthy women. Conclusions: Women with asthma experience cyclic changes in airflow as well as gas transfer and membrane diffusing capacity supportive of a hormonal effect on lung function.

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

4.7
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