Koehle Michael S, Sheel A William, Milsom William K, McKenzie Donald C
Allan McGavin Sport Medicine Centre, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2007 Dec;103(6):1973-8. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00545.2007. Epub 2007 Oct 18.
The purpose of this study was to compare chemoresponses following two different intermittent hypoxia (IH) protocols in humans. Ten men underwent two 7-day courses of poikilocapnic IH. The long-duration IH (LDIH) protocol consisted of daily 60-min exposures to normobaric 12% O(2). The short-duration IH (SDIH) protocol comprised twelve 5-min bouts of 12% O(2), separated by 5-min bouts of room air, daily. Isocapnic hypoxic ventilatory response (HVR) was measured daily during the protocol and 1 and 7 days following. Hypercapnic ventilatory response (HCVR) and CO(2) threshold and sensitivity (by the modified Read rebreathing technique) were measured on days 1, 8, and 14. Following 7 days of IH, the mean HVR was significantly increased from 0.47 +/- 0.07 and 0.47 +/- 0.08 to 0.70 +/- 0.06 and 0.79 +/- 0.06 l.min(-1).%Sa(O(2))(-1) (LDIH and SDIH, respectively), where %Sa(O(2)) is percent arterial oxygen saturation. The increase in HVR reached a plateau after the third day. One week post-IH, HVR values were unchanged from baseline. HCVR increased from 3.0 +/- 0.4 to 4.0 +/- 0.5 l.min(-1).mmHg(-1). In both the hyperoxic and hypoxic modified Read rebreathing tests, the slope of the CO(2)/ventilation plot was unchanged by either intervention, but the CO(2)/ventilation curve shifted to the left following IH. There were no correlations between the changes in response to hypoxia and hypercapnia. There were no significant differences between the two IH protocols for any measures, indicating that comparable changes in chemoreflex control occur with either protocol. These results also suggest that the two methods of measuring CO(2) response are not completely concordant and that the changes in CO(2) control do not correlate with the increase in the HVR.
本研究的目的是比较人类在两种不同的间歇性低氧(IH)方案后的化学感受器反应。10名男性接受了两个为期7天的异压性间歇性低氧疗程。长期间歇性低氧(LDIH)方案包括每天60分钟暴露于常压12%氧气环境。短期间歇性低氧(SDIH)方案包括每天12次5分钟的12%氧气暴露,每次暴露之间间隔5分钟的室内空气呼吸。在方案实施期间以及之后的第1天和第7天,每天测量等碳酸性低氧通气反应(HVR)。在第1天、第8天和第14天测量高碳酸性通气反应(HCVR)以及二氧化碳阈值和敏感性(采用改良的里德再呼吸技术)。经过7天的间歇性低氧处理后,平均HVR从0.47±0.07和0.47±0.08显著增加至0.70±0.06和0.79±0.06升·分钟⁻¹·%Sa(O₂)⁻¹(分别为LDIH和SDIH组,其中%Sa(O₂)为动脉血氧饱和度百分比)。HVR的增加在第三天后达到平台期。间歇性低氧处理一周后,HVR值与基线相比无变化。HCVR从3.0±0.4增加至4.0±0.5升·分钟⁻¹·毫米汞柱⁻¹。在高氧和低氧改良里德再呼吸试验中,两种干预措施均未改变二氧化碳/通气曲线的斜率,但间歇性低氧处理后二氧化碳/通气曲线向左移动。对低氧和高碳酸血症反应的变化之间无相关性。两种间歇性低氧方案在任何测量指标上均无显著差异,表明两种方案在化学反射控制方面发生了类似的变化。这些结果还表明,两种测量二氧化碳反应的方法并不完全一致,且二氧化碳控制的变化与HVR的增加无关。