4.5 Article

Cardiovascular control during voluntary static exercise in humans with tetraplegia

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 97, 期 6, 页码 2077-2082

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00546.2004

关键词

sympathetic decentralization; cardiac vagal outflow; tachycardia; attenuated pressor response; absent peripheral vasoconstriction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of the present study was 1) to investigate whether an increase in heart rate (HR) at the onset of voluntary static arm exercise in tetraplegic subjects was similar to that of normal subjects and 2) to identify how the cardiovascular adaptation during static exercise was disturbed by sympathetic decentralization. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) and HR were noninvasively recorded during static arm exercise at 35% of maximal voluntary contraction in six tetraplegic subjects who had complete cervical spinal cord injury (C-6-C-7). Stroke volume (SV), cardiac output (CO), and total peripheral resistance (TPR) were estimated by using a Modelflow method simulating aortic input impedance from arterial blood pressure waveform. In tetraplegic subjects, the increase in HR at the onset of static exercise was blunted compared with age-matched control subjects, whereas the peak increase in HR at the end of exercise was similar between the two groups. CO increased during exercise with no or slight decrease in SV. MAP increased approximately one-third above the control pressor response but TPR did not rise at all throughout static exercise, indicating that the slight pressor response is determined by the increase in CO. We conclude that the cardiovascular adaptation during voluntary static arm exercise in tetraplegic subjects is mainly accomplished by increasing cardiac pump output according to the tachycardia, which is controlled by cardiac vagal outflow, and that sympathetic decentralization causes both absent peripheral vasoconstriction and a decreased capacity to increase HR, especially at the onset of exercise.

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

4.5
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