Cardiac output during exercise by the open circuit acetylene washin method: comparison with direct Fick

Author:

Johnson B. D.1,Beck K. C.1,Proctor D. N.1,Miller J.1,Dietz N. M.1,Joyner M. J.1

Affiliation:

1. Departments of Internal Medicine and Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota 55905

Abstract

An open-circuit (OpCirc) acetylene uptake cardiac output (Q˙t) method was modified for use during exercise. Two computational techniques were used. OpCirc1 was based on the integrated uptake vs. end-tidal change in acetylene, and OpCirc2 was based on an iterative finite difference modeling method. Six subjects [28–44 yr, peak oxygen consumption (V˙o 2) = 120% predicted] performed cycle ergometry exercise to compareQ˙t using OpCirc and direct Fick methods. An incremental protocol was repeated twice, separated by a 10-min rest, and subsequently subjects exercised at 85–90% of their peak work rate. Coefficient of variation of the OpCirc methods and Fick were highest at rest (OpCirc1, 7%, OpCirc2, 12%, Fick, 10%) but were lower at moderate to high exercise intensities (OpCirc1, 3%, OpCirc2, 3%, Fick, 5%). OpCirc1 and OpCirc2 Q˙t correlated highly with Fick Q˙t( R 2 = 0.90 and 0.89, respectively). There were minimal differences between OpCirc1 and OpCirc2 compared with Fick up to moderate-intensity exercise (<70% peakV˙o 2); however, both techniques tended to underestimate Fick at >70% peakV˙o 2. These differences became significant for OpCirc1 only. Part of the differences between Fick and OpCirc methods at the higher exercise intensities are likely related to inhomogeneities in ventilation and perfusion matching ( R 2 = 0.36 for Fick − OpCirc1 vs. alveolar-to-arterial oxygen tension difference). In conclusion, both OpCirc methods provided reproducible, reliable measurements ofQ˙t during mild to moderate exercise. However, only OpCirc2 appeared to approximate FickQ˙t at the higher work intensities.

Publisher

American Physiological Society

Subject

Physiology (medical),Physiology

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