Cargando…

How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?

PURPOSE: Squat–stand manoeuvres (SSMs) have been used to induce blood pressure (BP) changes for the reliable assessment of dynamic cerebral autoregulation. However, they are physically demanding and thus multiple manoeuvres can be challenging for older subjects. This study aimed to determine the min...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barnes, S. C., Ball, N., Haunton, V. J., Robinson, T. G., Panerai, R. B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6182316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30128850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00421-018-3964-2
_version_ 1783362535476428800
author Barnes, S. C.
Ball, N.
Haunton, V. J.
Robinson, T. G.
Panerai, R. B.
author_facet Barnes, S. C.
Ball, N.
Haunton, V. J.
Robinson, T. G.
Panerai, R. B.
author_sort Barnes, S. C.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Squat–stand manoeuvres (SSMs) have been used to induce blood pressure (BP) changes for the reliable assessment of dynamic cerebral autoregulation. However, they are physically demanding and thus multiple manoeuvres can be challenging for older subjects. This study aimed to determine the minimum number of SSMs required to obtain satisfactory coherence, thus minimising the subjects’ workload. METHOD: 20 subjects performed SSMs at a frequency of 0.05 Hz. End-tidal CO(2), cerebral blood flow velocity, heart rate, continuous BP and the depth of the squat were measured. 11 subjects returned for a repeat visit. The time points at which subjects had performed 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 SSMs were determined. Transfer function analysis was performed on files altered to the required length to obtain estimates of coherence and the autoregulation index (ARI). RESULTS: After three SSMs, coherence (0.05 Hz) was 0.93 ± 0.05, and peaked at 0.95 ± 0.02 after 12 manoeuvres. ARI decreased consecutively with more manoeuvres. ARI was comparable across the two visits (p = 0.92), but coherence was significantly enhanced during the second visit (p < 0.01). The intra-subject coefficients of variation (CoV) for ARI remained comparable as the number of manoeuvres varied. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis can aid those designing SSM protocols, especially where participants are unable to tolerate a standard 5-min protocol or when a shorter protocol is needed to accommodate additional tests. We emphasise that fewer manoeuvres should only be used in exceptional circumstances, and where possible a full set of manoeuvres should be performed. Furthermore, these results need replicating at 0.10 Hz to ensure their applicability to different protocols.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6182316
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61823162018-10-22 How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation? Barnes, S. C. Ball, N. Haunton, V. J. Robinson, T. G. Panerai, R. B. Eur J Appl Physiol Original Article PURPOSE: Squat–stand manoeuvres (SSMs) have been used to induce blood pressure (BP) changes for the reliable assessment of dynamic cerebral autoregulation. However, they are physically demanding and thus multiple manoeuvres can be challenging for older subjects. This study aimed to determine the minimum number of SSMs required to obtain satisfactory coherence, thus minimising the subjects’ workload. METHOD: 20 subjects performed SSMs at a frequency of 0.05 Hz. End-tidal CO(2), cerebral blood flow velocity, heart rate, continuous BP and the depth of the squat were measured. 11 subjects returned for a repeat visit. The time points at which subjects had performed 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 SSMs were determined. Transfer function analysis was performed on files altered to the required length to obtain estimates of coherence and the autoregulation index (ARI). RESULTS: After three SSMs, coherence (0.05 Hz) was 0.93 ± 0.05, and peaked at 0.95 ± 0.02 after 12 manoeuvres. ARI decreased consecutively with more manoeuvres. ARI was comparable across the two visits (p = 0.92), but coherence was significantly enhanced during the second visit (p < 0.01). The intra-subject coefficients of variation (CoV) for ARI remained comparable as the number of manoeuvres varied. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis can aid those designing SSM protocols, especially where participants are unable to tolerate a standard 5-min protocol or when a shorter protocol is needed to accommodate additional tests. We emphasise that fewer manoeuvres should only be used in exceptional circumstances, and where possible a full set of manoeuvres should be performed. Furthermore, these results need replicating at 0.10 Hz to ensure their applicability to different protocols. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018-08-20 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6182316/ /pubmed/30128850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00421-018-3964-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Barnes, S. C.
Ball, N.
Haunton, V. J.
Robinson, T. G.
Panerai, R. B.
How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?
title How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?
title_full How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?
title_fullStr How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?
title_full_unstemmed How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?
title_short How many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?
title_sort how many squat–stand manoeuvres to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6182316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30128850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00421-018-3964-2
work_keys_str_mv AT barnessc howmanysquatstandmanoeuvrestoassessdynamiccerebralautoregulation
AT balln howmanysquatstandmanoeuvrestoassessdynamiccerebralautoregulation
AT hauntonvj howmanysquatstandmanoeuvrestoassessdynamiccerebralautoregulation
AT robinsontg howmanysquatstandmanoeuvrestoassessdynamiccerebralautoregulation
AT panerairb howmanysquatstandmanoeuvrestoassessdynamiccerebralautoregulation