English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The upright posture imposes a significant challenge to blood pressure regulation that is compensated through baroreflex-mediated increases in heart rate and vascular resistance. Orthostatic cardiac responses are easily inferred from heart rate, but vascular resistance responses are harder to elucidate. One approach is to determine vascular resistance as arterial pressure/blood flow, where blood flow is inferred from ultrasound-based measurements of brachial blood velocity. This relies on the as yet unvalidated assumption that brachial artery diameter does not change during orthostatic stress, and so velocity is proportional to flow. It is also unknown whether the orthostatic vascular resistance response is related to initial blood vessel diameter.    Methods  We determined beat-to-beat heart rate (ECG), blood pressure (Portapres) and vascular resistance (Doppler ultrasound) during a combined orthostatic stress test (head-upright tilting and lower body negative pressure) continued until presyncope. Participants were 16 men (aged 38.4±2.3 years) who lived permanently at high altitude (4450m).    Results  The supine brachial diameter ranged from 2.9–5.6mm. Brachial diameter did not change during orthostatic stress (supine: 4.19±0.2mm; tilt: 4.20±0.2mm; -20mmHg lower body negative pressure: 4.19±0.2mm, p = 0.811). There was no significant correlation between supine brachial artery diameter and the maximum vascular resistance response (r = 0.323; p = 0.29). Forearm vascular resistance responses evaluated using brachial arterial flow and velocity were strongly correlated (r = 0.989, p<0.00001) and demonstrated high equivalency with minimal bias (-6.34±24.4%).    Discussion  During severe orthostatic stress the diameter of the brachial artery remains constant, supporting use of brachial velocity for accurate continuous non-invasive orthostatic vascular resistance responses. The magnitude of the orthostatic forearm vascular resistance response was unrelated to the baseline brachial arterial diameter, suggesting that upstream vessel size does not matter in the ability to mount a vasoconstrictor response to orthostasis.

Evaluation of forearm vascular resistance during orthostatic stress: Velocity is proportional to flow and size doesn’t matter