A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression amalgamating the driven approaches used to quantify dynamic cerebral autoregulation

Numerous driven techniques have been utilized to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation (dCA) in healthy and clinical populations. The current review aimed to amalgamate this literature and provide recommendations to create greater standardization for future research. The PubMed database was searched with inclusion criteria consisting of original research articles using driven dCA assessments in humans. Risk of bias were completed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. Meta-analyses were conducted for coherence, phase, and gain metrics at 0.05 and 0.10 Hz using deep-breathing, oscillatory lower body negative pressure (OLBNP), sit-to-stand maneuvers, and squat-stand maneuvers. A total of 113 studies were included, with 40 of these incorporating clinical populations. A total of 4126 participants were identified, with younger adults (18–40 years) being the most studied population. The most common techniques were squat-stands (n = 43), deep-breathing (n = 25), OLBNP (n = 20), and sit-to-stands (n = 16). Pooled coherence point estimates were: OLBNP 0.70 (95%CI:0.59–0.82), sit-to-stands 0.87 (95%CI:0.79–0.95), and squat-stands 0.98 (95%CI:0.98–0.99) at 0.05 Hz; and deep-breathing 0.90 (95%CI:0.81–0.99); OLBNP 0.67 (95%CI:0.44–0.90); and squat-stands 0.99 (95%CI:0.99–0.99) at 0.10 Hz. This review summarizes clinical findings, discusses the pros/cons of the 11 unique driven techniques included, and provides recommendations for future investigations into the unique physiological intricacies of dCA.