The jugular venous‐to‐arterial PCO2${P_{{\mathrm{C}}{{\mathrm{O}}_{\mathrm{2}}}}}$ difference during rebreathing and end‐tidal forcing: Relationship with cerebral perfusion

Author:

Carr Jay M. J. R.1ORCID,Day Trevor A.2ORCID,Ainslie Philip N.1ORCID,Hoiland Ryan L.1345ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Centre for Heart, Lung and Vascular Health University of British Columbia Okanagan Kelowna BC Canada

2. Department of Biology Faculty of Science and Technology Mount Royal University Calgary AB Canada

3. Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Vancouver General Hospital University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada

4. Department of Cellular and Physiological Sciences Faculty of Medicine University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada

5. International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada

Abstract

AbstractWe examined two assumptions of the modified rebreathing technique for the assessment of the ventilatory central chemoreflex (CCR) and cerebrovascular CO2 reactivity (CVR), hypothesizing: (1) that rebreathing abolishes the gradient between the partial pressures of arterial and brain tissue CO2 [measured via the surrogate jugular venous and arterial difference (Pjv‐aCO2)] and (2) rebreathing eliminates the capacity of CVR to influence the Pjv‐aCO2 difference, and thus affect CCR sensitivity. We also evaluated these variables during two separate dynamic end‐tidal forcing (ETF) protocols (termed: ETF‐1 and ETF‐2), another method of assessing CCR sensitivity and CVR. Healthy participants were included in the rebreathing (n = 9), ETF‐1 (n = 11) and ETF‐2 (n = 10) protocols and underwent radial artery and internal jugular vein (advanced to jugular bulb) catheterization to collect blood samples. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound was used to measure middle cerebral artery blood velocity (MCAv). The Pjv‐aCO2 difference was not abolished during rebreathing (6.2 ± 2.6 mmHg; P < 0.001), ETF‐1 (9.3 ± 1.5 mmHg; P < 0.001) or ETF‐2 (8.6 ± 1.4 mmHg; P < 0.001). The Pjv‐aCO2 difference did not change during the rebreathing protocol (−0.1 ± 1.2 mmHg; P = 0.83), but was reduced during the ETF‐1 (−3.9 ± 1.1 mmHg; P < 0.001) and ETF‐2 (−3.4 ± 1.2 mmHg; P = 0.001) protocols. Overall, increases in MCAv were associated with reductions in the Pjv‐aCO2 difference during ETF (−0.095 ± 0.089 mmHg cm−1 s−1; P = 0.001) but not during rebreathing (−0.028 ± 0.045 mmHg · cm−1 · s−1; P = 0.067). These findings suggest that, although the Pjv‐aCO2 is not abolished during any chemoreflex assessment technique, hyperoxic hypercapnic rebreathing is probably more appropriate to assess CCR sensitivity independent of cerebrovascular reactivity to CO2. imageKey points Modified rebreathing is a technique used to assess the ventilatory central chemoreflex and is based on the premise that the rebreathing method eliminates the difference between arterial and brain tissue . Therefore, rebreathing is assumed to isolate the ventilatory response to central chemoreflex stimulation from the influence of cerebral blood flow. We assessed these assumptions by measuring arterial and jugular venous bulb and middle cerebral artery blood velocity during modified rebreathing and compared these data against data from another test of the ventilatory central chemoreflex using hypercapnic dynamic end‐tidal forcing. The difference between arterial and jugular venous bulb remained present during both rebreathing and end‐tidal forcing tests, whereas middle cerebral artery blood velocity was associated with the difference during end‐tidal forcing but not rebreathing. These findings offer substantiating evidence that clarifies and refines the assumptions of modified rebreathing tests, enhancing interpretation of future findings.

Funder

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

Canada Research Chairs

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Physiology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3