4.2 Article

Repeated exercise-induced arterial hypoxemia in a healthy untrained woman

期刊

RESPIRATORY PHYSIOLOGY & NEUROBIOLOGY
卷 183, 期 3, 页码 201-205

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.resp.2012.06.021

关键词

Expiratory flow limitation; Heliox; Hypoxemia; Sex-based differences; Ventilatory mechanics

资金

  1. Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. NSERC
  3. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
  4. Canadian Stroke Network
  5. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Institute of Circulatory and Respiratory Health
  6. CIHR Institute of Aging
  7. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research
  8. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  9. MSFHR
  10. University of British Columbia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A healthy 36-year-old untrained (maximal oxygen consumption ((V) over dot(O2) (max)): 39 mL/kg/min) woman completed multiple graded exercise tests on a treadmill. Temperature-corrected arterial blood samples were obtained in addition to esophageal pressure. Significant hypoxemia (-13 mmHg arterial oxygen tension decrease) and arterial oxyhemoglobin desaturation (-6% decrease) was absented relative to rest and occurred during submaximal exercise and worsened at maximal intensities. Expiratory flow limitation (28-40% intersection of tidal volume) was present at near-maximal intensities. Relieving mechanical ventilatory constraints with a helium inspirate (79% He:21% O-2) partially reversed the hypoxemia. Conversely, increasing chemical ventilatory stimuli, with hypercapnia (3.5% CO2), failed to increase ventilation. Maintaining oxyhemoglobin saturation, via a mildly hyperoxic (26% O-2) inspirate, increased exercise duration (+45 s) and (V) over dot(O2 max) (+5 mL/kg/min). We attribute the hypoxemia to an excessive A-aO(2) resulting from ventilation-perfusion mismatch and secondarily to mechanical ventilatory constraints. We conclude that a healthy untrained woman can develop EIAH and this remains stable over a period of 6 months. (C) 2012 Elsevier By. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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