呼气流量限制在常氧和低氧之间持续存在

Raberin Antoine, Giorgio Manferdelli, Forrest Schorderet, N. Bourdillon, Grégoire P. Millet
{"title":"呼气流量限制在常氧和低氧之间持续存在","authors":"Raberin Antoine, Giorgio Manferdelli, Forrest Schorderet, N. Bourdillon, Grégoire P. Millet","doi":"10.36950/2024.2ciss066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction \nExpiratory flow limitation (EFL) refers to the inability to generate higher airflow despite greater respiratory effort and is common in both men and women. In normoxic condition, EFL is contingent upon an imbalance between ventilatory demands and capacity. Since hypoxia is known to alter ventilatory drive and pattern, it may influence the development of EFL. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the origin of EFL in hypoxia and its repeatability and persistence during exercise in hypoxia. \nMethod \nFifty-one healthy active individuals (27 men and 24 women) performed a lung function test and a maximal incremental exercise test on a cycle-ergometer in normoxia and hypoxia (inspired oxygen fraction = 0.14) on two separate visits. Ventilatory capacity, assessed using the slope ratio (SR), were evaluated from maximal flow volume curve analyses. \nResults \nDuring exercise in normoxia, 28 participants exhibited EFL (55%). Another set of 28 participants exhibited EFL in hypoxia but they were not all the same individuals as those in normoxia. In normoxia, both SR and maximum minute ventilation (V̇E) were higher in the EFL group than the non-EFL group (p = 0.029 and p <0.001; respectively). However, in hypoxia, only maximum V̇E was higher in the EFL group compared to non-EFL group (p = 0.006). \nParticipants were then classified into 4 groups according to the occurrence of EFL in both normoxia and hypoxia: non-EFL in both conditions (non-EFLN/H, n = 18), EFL in both conditions (EFLN/H, n = 23), EFL developed only in normoxia (EFLN+/H-, n = 5), EFL developed only in hypoxia (EFLN-/H+, n = 5). \nThe EFLN+/H- group showed different V̇E changes between normoxia and hypoxia (-13.5 ± 7.8%) compared to the EFLN-/H+ (+6.7 ± 6.3%) and the non-EFLN/H groups (+5.1 ± 10.3%; p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively). The difference with the EFLN/H (-1.7 ± 8.0%) did not reach significance (p = 0.057). Breathing frequency changes between normoxia and hypoxia were different between the EFLN-/H+ group (+4.6 ± 12.9%) and the EFLN+/H- group (-11.7 ± 13.1%) (p = 0.039). Normoxia to hypoxia decrease in maximal oxygen uptake was not significantly larger in the EFL N+/H- group (-18.4 ± 3.4%) than in the EFL EFLN-/H+ group (-10.3 ± 5.4%; p = 0.087). \nDiscussion/Conclusion \nHypoxia altered EFL development since there was a shift in the individuals who exhibited flow limitation between normoxia and hypoxia. This can be attributed to the extent of ventilatory reserve utilization. Specifically, those who developed EFL exclusively in hypoxia exhibited a significant increase in V̇E whereas those with EFL only in normoxia experienced a significant decrease in V̇E. Notably in hypoxia, the ventilatory capacity did not differ between individuals with EFL and those without. This observation suggests that in hypoxia, the development of EFL relied more on ventilatory demands than on ventilatory capacity.","PeriodicalId":415194,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues in Sport Science (CISS)","volume":"82 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Persistence of expiratory flow limitations between normoxia and hypoxia\",\"authors\":\"Raberin Antoine, Giorgio Manferdelli, Forrest Schorderet, N. Bourdillon, Grégoire P. Millet\",\"doi\":\"10.36950/2024.2ciss066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction \\nExpiratory flow limitation (EFL) refers to the inability to generate higher airflow despite greater respiratory effort and is common in both men and women. In normoxic condition, EFL is contingent upon an imbalance between ventilatory demands and capacity. Since hypoxia is known to alter ventilatory drive and pattern, it may influence the development of EFL. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the origin of EFL in hypoxia and its repeatability and persistence during exercise in hypoxia. \\nMethod \\nFifty-one healthy active individuals (27 men and 24 women) performed a lung function test and a maximal incremental exercise test on a cycle-ergometer in normoxia and hypoxia (inspired oxygen fraction = 0.14) on two separate visits. Ventilatory capacity, assessed using the slope ratio (SR), were evaluated from maximal flow volume curve analyses. \\nResults \\nDuring exercise in normoxia, 28 participants exhibited EFL (55%). Another set of 28 participants exhibited EFL in hypoxia but they were not all the same individuals as those in normoxia. In normoxia, both SR and maximum minute ventilation (V̇E) were higher in the EFL group than the non-EFL group (p = 0.029 and p <0.001; respectively). However, in hypoxia, only maximum V̇E was higher in the EFL group compared to non-EFL group (p = 0.006). \\nParticipants were then classified into 4 groups according to the occurrence of EFL in both normoxia and hypoxia: non-EFL in both conditions (non-EFLN/H, n = 18), EFL in both conditions (EFLN/H, n = 23), EFL developed only in normoxia (EFLN+/H-, n = 5), EFL developed only in hypoxia (EFLN-/H+, n = 5). \\nThe EFLN+/H- group showed different V̇E changes between normoxia and hypoxia (-13.5 ± 7.8%) compared to the EFLN-/H+ (+6.7 ± 6.3%) and the non-EFLN/H groups (+5.1 ± 10.3%; p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively). The difference with the EFLN/H (-1.7 ± 8.0%) did not reach significance (p = 0.057). Breathing frequency changes between normoxia and hypoxia were different between the EFLN-/H+ group (+4.6 ± 12.9%) and the EFLN+/H- group (-11.7 ± 13.1%) (p = 0.039). Normoxia to hypoxia decrease in maximal oxygen uptake was not significantly larger in the EFL N+/H- group (-18.4 ± 3.4%) than in the EFL EFLN-/H+ group (-10.3 ± 5.4%; p = 0.087). \\nDiscussion/Conclusion \\nHypoxia altered EFL development since there was a shift in the individuals who exhibited flow limitation between normoxia and hypoxia. This can be attributed to the extent of ventilatory reserve utilization. Specifically, those who developed EFL exclusively in hypoxia exhibited a significant increase in V̇E whereas those with EFL only in normoxia experienced a significant decrease in V̇E. Notably in hypoxia, the ventilatory capacity did not differ between individuals with EFL and those without. This observation suggests that in hypoxia, the development of EFL relied more on ventilatory demands than on ventilatory capacity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":415194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Issues in Sport Science (CISS)\",\"volume\":\"82 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Issues in Sport Science (CISS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36950/2024.2ciss066\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Issues in Sport Science (CISS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36950/2024.2ciss066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言 呼气流量限制(EFL)是指尽管呼吸努力较大,但仍无法产生较高的气流,在男性和女性中都很常见。在正常缺氧条件下,呼气流量限制取决于通气需求和能力之间的不平衡。众所周知,缺氧会改变通气动力和模式,因此可能会影响 EFL 的发展。因此,本研究旨在调查缺氧时 EFL 的起源及其在缺氧运动中的可重复性和持续性。方法 51 名健康的运动者(27 名男性和 24 名女性)分别在常氧和缺氧(吸入氧分数 = 0.14)条件下进行了肺功能测试和循环测力计最大增量运动测试。通过最大血流量曲线分析,使用斜率(SR)评估通气能力。结果 在常氧状态下运动时,28 名参与者表现出 EFL(55%)。另一组 28 名参与者在低氧状态下表现出 EFL,但他们与常氧状态下的参与者不尽相同。在常氧状态下,EFL 组的 SR 和最大分钟通气量(V̇E)均高于非 EFL 组(分别为 p = 0.029 和 p <0.001)。然而,在缺氧情况下,EFL 组只有最大 V̇E 比非 EFL 组高(p = 0.006)。然后,根据在常氧和缺氧两种情况下出现的 EFL 将参与者分为 4 组:在两种情况下均未出现 EFL(non-EFLN/H,n = 18)、在两种情况下均出现 EFL(EFLN/H,n = 23)、仅在常氧情况下出现 EFL(EFLN+/H-,n = 5)、仅在缺氧情况下出现 EFL(EFLN-/H+,n = 5)。与 EFLN-/H+ 组(+6.7 ± 6.3%)和非 EFLN/H 组(+5.1 ± 10.3%;p = 0.004 和 p < 0.001)相比,EFLN+/H- 组在常氧和缺氧时的 V̇E 变化不同(-13.5 ± 7.8%)。与 EFLN/H 组(-1.7 ± 8.0%)的差异不显著(p = 0.057)。EFLN-/H+组(+4.6 ± 12.9%)和EFLN+/H-组(-11.7 ± 13.1%)在常氧和低氧之间的呼吸频率变化不同(p = 0.039)。EFL N+/H- 组(-18.4 ± 3.4%)与 EFL EFLN-/H+ 组(-10.3 ± 5.4%;p = 0.087)相比,最大摄氧量从正常缺氧到低氧的下降幅度并不明显。讨论/结论 缺氧改变了 EFL 的发展,因为表现出血流受限的个体在常氧和缺氧之间发生了转变。这可归因于通气储备的利用程度。具体来说,在缺氧时才出现血流受限的人,其 V̇E 显著增加,而在常氧时才出现血流受限的人,其 V̇E 显著减少。值得注意的是,在低氧条件下,EFL患者和非EFL患者的通气能力没有差异。这一观察结果表明,在缺氧条件下,EFL的发展更多地依赖于通气需求,而不是通气能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Persistence of expiratory flow limitations between normoxia and hypoxia
Introduction Expiratory flow limitation (EFL) refers to the inability to generate higher airflow despite greater respiratory effort and is common in both men and women. In normoxic condition, EFL is contingent upon an imbalance between ventilatory demands and capacity. Since hypoxia is known to alter ventilatory drive and pattern, it may influence the development of EFL. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the origin of EFL in hypoxia and its repeatability and persistence during exercise in hypoxia. Method Fifty-one healthy active individuals (27 men and 24 women) performed a lung function test and a maximal incremental exercise test on a cycle-ergometer in normoxia and hypoxia (inspired oxygen fraction = 0.14) on two separate visits. Ventilatory capacity, assessed using the slope ratio (SR), were evaluated from maximal flow volume curve analyses. Results During exercise in normoxia, 28 participants exhibited EFL (55%). Another set of 28 participants exhibited EFL in hypoxia but they were not all the same individuals as those in normoxia. In normoxia, both SR and maximum minute ventilation (V̇E) were higher in the EFL group than the non-EFL group (p = 0.029 and p <0.001; respectively). However, in hypoxia, only maximum V̇E was higher in the EFL group compared to non-EFL group (p = 0.006). Participants were then classified into 4 groups according to the occurrence of EFL in both normoxia and hypoxia: non-EFL in both conditions (non-EFLN/H, n = 18), EFL in both conditions (EFLN/H, n = 23), EFL developed only in normoxia (EFLN+/H-, n = 5), EFL developed only in hypoxia (EFLN-/H+, n = 5). The EFLN+/H- group showed different V̇E changes between normoxia and hypoxia (-13.5 ± 7.8%) compared to the EFLN-/H+ (+6.7 ± 6.3%) and the non-EFLN/H groups (+5.1 ± 10.3%; p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively). The difference with the EFLN/H (-1.7 ± 8.0%) did not reach significance (p = 0.057). Breathing frequency changes between normoxia and hypoxia were different between the EFLN-/H+ group (+4.6 ± 12.9%) and the EFLN+/H- group (-11.7 ± 13.1%) (p = 0.039). Normoxia to hypoxia decrease in maximal oxygen uptake was not significantly larger in the EFL N+/H- group (-18.4 ± 3.4%) than in the EFL EFLN-/H+ group (-10.3 ± 5.4%; p = 0.087). Discussion/Conclusion Hypoxia altered EFL development since there was a shift in the individuals who exhibited flow limitation between normoxia and hypoxia. This can be attributed to the extent of ventilatory reserve utilization. Specifically, those who developed EFL exclusively in hypoxia exhibited a significant increase in V̇E whereas those with EFL only in normoxia experienced a significant decrease in V̇E. Notably in hypoxia, the ventilatory capacity did not differ between individuals with EFL and those without. This observation suggests that in hypoxia, the development of EFL relied more on ventilatory demands than on ventilatory capacity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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