4.7 Article

Cerebrovascular reserve capacity is impaired in patients with sickle cell disease

期刊

BLOOD
卷 114, 期 16, 页码 3473-3478

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2009-05-223859

关键词

-

资金

  1. Slotervaart Hospital Fund for Clinical Research
  2. Dutch Diabetes Foundation [2004-00-001]
  3. Dutch Heart Foundation [2006B027]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is associated with a high incidence of ischemic stroke. SCD is characterized by hemolytic anemia, resulting in reduced nitric oxide-bioavailability, and by impaired cerebrovascular hemodynamics. Cerebrovascular CO2 responsiveness is nitric oxide dependent and has been related to an increased stroke risk in microvascular diseases. We questioned whether cerebrovascular CO2 responsiveness is impaired in SCD and related to hemolytic anemia. Transcranial Doppler-determined mean cerebral blood flow velocity (V-mean), near-infrared spectroscopy-determined cerebral oxygenation, and end-tidal CO2 tension were monitored during normocapnia and hypercapnia in 23 patients and 16 control subjects. Cerebrovascular CO2 responsiveness was quantified as Delta% V-mean and Delta mu mol/L cerebral oxyhemoglobin, deoxyhemoglobin, and total hemoglobin per mm Hg change in end-tidal CO2 tension. Both ways of measurements revealed lower cerebrovascular CO2 responsiveness in SCD patients versus controls (V-mean, 3.7, 3.1-4.7 vs 5.9, 4.6-6.7 Delta% V-mean per mm Hg, P < .001; oxyhemoglobin, 0.36, 0.14-0.82 vs 0.78, 0.61-1.22 Delta mu mol/L per mm Hg, P = .025; deoxyhemoglobin, 0.35, 0.14-0.67 vs 0.58, 0.41-0.86 Delta mu mol/L per mm Hg, P = .033; total-hemoglobin, 0.13, 0.02-0.18 vs 0.23, 0.13-0.38 Delta mu mol/L per mm Hg, P = .038). Cerebrovascular CO2 responsiveness was not related to markers of hemolytic anemia. In SCD patients, impaired cerebrovascular CO2 responsiveness reflects reduced cerebrovascular reserve capacity, which may play a role in pathophysiology of stroke. (Blood. 2009;114:3473-3478)

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

4.7
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