4.6 Article

Alterations in upper airway cross-sectional area in response to lower body positive pressure in healthy subjects

期刊

THORAX
卷 62, 期 10, 页码 868-872

出版社

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/thx.2006.071183

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Fluid accumulation in the neck during recumbency might narrow the upper airway (UA) and thereby contribute to its collapse in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). It is hypothesised that acute fluid shifts from the legs to the upper body in healthy subjects would increase neck circumference and reduce the cross-sectional area of the UA (UA-XSA). Methods: In 27 healthy non-obese subjects of mean (SE) age 39 (3) years and body mass index 23.2 (0.6) kg/m(2) studied while supine, leg fluid volume was measured using bioelectrical impedance, neck circumference using a mercury strain gauge and mean UA-XSA between the velum and the glottis using acoustic pharyngometry at end expiration. Measurements were made at baseline after which subjects were randomly assigned to a 5 min time control period or to a 5 min application of lower body positive pressure (LBPP) at 40 mm Hg by anti-shock trousers, separated by a 15 min washout period. Subjects then crossed over to the opposite arm of the study. Results: Compared with control, application of LBPP significantly reduced leg fluid volume (p < 0.001) and increased neck circumference (p < 0.001), both at 1 min and 5 min, and reduced UA-XSA after both 1 min (20.15 cm(2); 95% CI 20.23 to 20.09, p < 0.001) and 5 min (20.20 cm(2); 95% CI 20.33 to 20.09, p < 0.001). Conclusion: In healthy subjects, displacement of fluid from the legs by LBPP causes distension of the neck and narrowing of the UA lumen. Fluid displacement from the lower to the upper body while recumbent may contribute to pharyngeal narrowing and obstruction to airflow in patients with OSA. This may have particular pathological significance in oedematous states such as heart and renal failure.

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

4.6
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