...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Physiological Reports >Efficacy of fluid loading as a countermeasure to the hemodynamic and hormonal changes of 28‐h head‐down bed rest
【24h】

Efficacy of fluid loading as a countermeasure to the hemodynamic and hormonal changes of 28‐h head‐down bed rest

机译：液体负荷的功效可作为28小时头朝下卧床休息的血流动力学和激素变化的对策

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

After exposure to microgravity, or head‐down bed rest (HDBR), fluid loading is often used with the intent of increasing plasma volume and maintaining mean arterial pressure during orthostatic stress. Nine men (aged 18–32?years) underwent three randomized trials with lower body negative pressure (LBNP) before and after: (1) 4‐h of sitting with fluid loading (1?g sodium chloride/125?mL of water starting 2.5‐h before LBNP), (2) 28‐h of 6‐degree HDBR without fluid loading, and (3) 28‐h of 6‐degree HDBR with fluid loading. LBNP was progressive from 0 to ?40?mmHg. After 28‐h HDBR, fluid loading did not protect against the loss of plasma volume (?280?±?64?mL without fluid loading, ?207?±?86 with fluid loading, P ?=?0.472) nor did it protect against a drop of mean arterial pressure ( P ?=?0.017) during LBNP (Post‐28?h HDBR response from 0 to ?40?mmHg LBNP: 88?±?4 to 85?±?4?mmHg without fluid loading and 93?±?4 to 88?±?5?mmHg with fluid loading, P ?=?0.557 between trials). However, fluid loading did protect against the loss of stroke volume index and central venous pressure observed after 28‐h HDBR. Fluid loading also attenuated the increase of angiotensin II seen after 28‐h HDBR and throughout the LBNP protocol (Post‐28?h HDBR response from 0 to ?40?mmHg LBNP: 16.6?±?3.4 to 23.7?±?5.0?pg/mL without fluid loading and 6.1?±?0.8 to 12.2?±?2.3?pg/mL with fluid loading, P ??0.001 between trials). Our results indicate that fluid loading did not protect against plasma volume loss due to HDBR or change blood pressure responses to LBNP. However, changes in central venous pressure, stroke volume and fluid regulatory hormones could potentially influence longer duration studies and those with more severe orthostatic stress.
机译：暴露于微重力或平躺式卧床休息（HDBR）后，经常使用流体负荷以增加血浆量并在体位性应激期间维持平均动脉压。九名男性（年龄在18-32岁之间）在前后进行了三项下体负压（LBNP）的随机试验：（1）坐着4小时坐满液体（1微克氯化钠/ 125微升水开始LBNP前2.5小时），（2）无液体负载的6度HDBR 28小时和（3）有液体负载的6度HDBR 28小时。 LBNP从0升高至≥40mmHg。 HDBR 28小时后，液体负荷不能防止血浆容量的损失（无液体负荷为280±±64 mL，有液体负荷为207≤±86，P≤0.472），也不能起到保护作用在LBNP（28？h后HDBR反应从0到？40？mmHg LBNP：88？±？4到85？±？4？mmHg的情况下抵抗平均动脉压下降（P？=？0.017）流体负荷为93±±4到88±±5？mmHg，两次试验之间P≥0.557）。然而，在28 h HDBR后观察到的液体负荷确实可以防止中风量指数和中心静脉压的损失。在28h HDBR后和整个LBNP方案中，液体负荷也减弱了血管紧张素II的增加（28h h HDBR反应从0到40mmHg LBNP：16.6±±3.4到23.7±5.0 pg / mL（无液体负荷）和6.1？±？0.8到12.2？±？2.3？pg / mL（液体负荷，两次试验之间P 0.001）。我们的结果表明，流体负荷不能防止因HDBR引起的血浆容量损失或改变对LBNP的血压反应。但是，中心静脉压，中风量和体液调节激素的变化可能会影响持续时间较长的研究以及体位压力较大的研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号