4.6 Article

Chronic Heart Failure Does Not Attenuate the Total Activity of Sympathetic Outflow to Skin During Whole-Body Heating

期刊

CIRCULATION-HEART FAILURE
卷 6, 期 2, 页码 271-278

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.112.000135

关键词

autonomic; heart failure; regional blood flow; vasodilation

资金

  1. American Heart Association [0565399U, 0635245 N]
  2. National Institutes of Health [P01 HL096570, M01 RR010732, C06 RR016499, UL1 RR033184]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Previous studies show that the rise in skin blood flow and cutaneous vascular conductance during heat stress is substantially attenuated in chronic heart failure (CHF) patients. The mechanisms responsible for this finding are not clear. In particular, little is known regarding the responses of skin sympathetic nerve activity (SSNA) that control the skin blood flow during heat stress in CHF patients. We examined the effects of a modest heat stress to test the hypothesis that SSNA responses could be attenuated in CHF. Methods and Results-We assessed SSNA (microneurography) from the peroneal nerve and skin blood flow (forearm laser Doppler) in 9 patients with stable class II-III CHF and in matched healthy subjects during passive whole-body heating with a water-perfused suit. Whole-body heating induced similar increases in internal temperature (approximate to 0.6 degrees C) in both groups. Whole-body heat stress evoked similar SSNA activation in CHF patients (Delta 891+/-110 U/min) and the control subjects (Delta 787+/-84 U/min; P=0.66), whereas the elevation in forearm cutaneous vascular conductance in patients with CHF was significantly lower than that in healthy control subjects (Delta 131+/-29% vs Delta 623+/-131%; P=0.001). Conclusions-The present data show that SSNA activation during a modest whole-body heat stress is not attenuated in CHF. Thus, the attenuated skin vasodilator response in CHF patients is not attributable to a reduction in total activity of sympathetic outflow to skin.

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

4.6
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