Difference in expiratory flow limitations development in normoxia and hypoxia in healthy individuals

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PHYSIOLOGY
Antoine Raberin , Giorgio Manferdelli, Forrest Schorderet, Yannick Monnier, Ruben Tato Perez, Nicolas Bourdillon, Grégoire P. Millet
{"title":"Difference in expiratory flow limitations development in normoxia and hypoxia in healthy individuals","authors":"Antoine Raberin ,&nbsp;Giorgio Manferdelli,&nbsp;Forrest Schorderet,&nbsp;Yannick Monnier,&nbsp;Ruben Tato Perez,&nbsp;Nicolas Bourdillon,&nbsp;Grégoire P. Millet","doi":"10.1016/j.resp.2024.104316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The present study investigated the maintenance/repeatability of expiratory flow limitation (EFL) between normoxia and hypoxia.</p><p>Fifty-one healthy active individuals (27 men and 24 women) performed a lung function test and a maximal incremental cycling test in both normoxia and hypoxia (inspired oxygen fraction = 0.14) on two separate visits.</p><p>During exercise in normoxia, 28 participants exhibited EFL (55 %). In hypoxia, another cohort of 28 participants exhibited EFL. The two groups only partly overlapped.</p><p>Individuals with EFL only in normoxia reported lower maximal ventilation values in hypoxia than in normoxia (n=5; −13.5 ± 7.8 %) compared to their counterparts with EFL only in hypoxia (n=5; +6.7 ± 6.3 %) or without EFL (n=18; +5.1 ± 10.3 %) (p=0.004 and p&lt;0.001, respectively).</p><p>EFL development may be induced by different mechanisms in hypoxia vs. normoxia since the individuals who exhibited flow limitation were not the same between the two environmental conditions. This change seems influenced by the magnitude of the maximal ventilation change.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20961,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology","volume":"329 ","pages":"Article 104316"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569904824001095/pdfft?md5=8fb0a78dbac47078e7fb442521270ba6&pid=1-s2.0-S1569904824001095-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569904824001095","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study investigated the maintenance/repeatability of expiratory flow limitation (EFL) between normoxia and hypoxia.

Fifty-one healthy active individuals (27 men and 24 women) performed a lung function test and a maximal incremental cycling test in both normoxia and hypoxia (inspired oxygen fraction = 0.14) on two separate visits.

During exercise in normoxia, 28 participants exhibited EFL (55 %). In hypoxia, another cohort of 28 participants exhibited EFL. The two groups only partly overlapped.

Individuals with EFL only in normoxia reported lower maximal ventilation values in hypoxia than in normoxia (n=5; −13.5 ± 7.8 %) compared to their counterparts with EFL only in hypoxia (n=5; +6.7 ± 6.3 %) or without EFL (n=18; +5.1 ± 10.3 %) (p=0.004 and p<0.001, respectively).

EFL development may be induced by different mechanisms in hypoxia vs. normoxia since the individuals who exhibited flow limitation were not the same between the two environmental conditions. This change seems influenced by the magnitude of the maximal ventilation change.

健康人在常氧和低氧条件下呼气流量限制发展的差异。
本研究调查了呼气流量限制(EFL)在常氧和低氧之间的维持/重复性。51 名健康的运动者(27 名男性和 24 名女性)在常氧和低氧(吸入氧分压 = 0.14)环境下分别进行了肺功能测试和最大增量骑行测试。在常氧运动中,28 名参与者表现出 EFL(55%)。在低氧状态下,另一组 28 名参与者表现出 EFL。这两组只有部分重叠。与仅在缺氧状态下有 EFL 的参与者(5 人;+6.7 ± 6.3%)或没有 EFL 的参与者(18 人;+5.1 ± 10.3%)相比,仅在常氧状态下有 EFL 的参与者在缺氧状态下的最大通气值低于常氧状态下的最大通气值(5 人;-13.5 ± 7.8%)(p=0.004 和 p=0.14)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
104
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology (RESPNB) publishes original articles and invited reviews concerning physiology and pathophysiology of respiration in its broadest sense. Although a special focus is on topics in neurobiology, high quality papers in respiratory molecular and cellular biology are also welcome, as are high-quality papers in traditional areas, such as: -Mechanics of breathing- Gas exchange and acid-base balance- Respiration at rest and exercise- Respiration in unusual conditions, like high or low pressure or changes of temperature, low ambient oxygen- Embryonic and adult respiration- Comparative respiratory physiology. Papers on clinical aspects, original methods, as well as theoretical papers are also considered as long as they foster the understanding of respiratory physiology and pathophysiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信