4.5 Article

Impact of controlling shear rate on flow-mediated dilation responses in the brachial artery of humans

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 97, 期 2, 页码 499-508

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01245.2003

关键词

reactive hyperemia; endothelium; ultrasonography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The reactive hyperemia test (RHtest) evokes a transient increase in shear stress as a stimulus for endothelial-dependent flow-mediated vasodilation (EDFMD). We developed a noninvasive method to create controlled elevations in brachial artery (BA) shear rate (SR, estimate of shear stress), controlled hyperemia test (CHtest), and assessed the impact of this vs. the RHtest approach on EDFMD. Eight healthy subjects participated in two trials of each test on 3 separate days. For the CHtest, SR was step increased from 8 to 50 s(-1), created by controlled release of BA compression during forearm heating. For the RHtest, transient increases in SR were achieved after 5 min of forearm occlusion. BA diameter and blood flow velocity (ultrasound) were measured upstream of compression and occlusion sites. Both tests elicited significant dilation (RHtest: 6.33 +/- 3.12%; CHtest: 3.00 +/- 1.05%). The CHtest resulted in 1) reduced between-subject SR and EDFMD variability vs. the RHtest [SR coefficient of variation (CV): 4.9% vs. 36.6%; EDFMD CV: 36.16% vs. 51.80%] and 2) virtual elimination of the impact of BA diameter on the peak EDFMD response (peak EDFMD vs. baseline diameter for RHtest, r(2) = 0.64, P < 0.01, vs. CHtest, r(2) = 0.14, P < 0.01). Normalization of the RHtest EDFMD response to the magnitude of the SR stimulus eliminated test differences in between-subject response variability. Reductions in trial-to-trial and day-to-day SR variability with the CHtest did not reduce EDFMD variability. Between-subject SR variability contributes to EDFMD variability with the RHtest. SR controls with the CHtest or RHtest response normalization are essential for examining EDFMD between groups differing in baseline arterial diameter.

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