Duling B R, Damon D H
Circ Res. 1987 Jan;60(1):1-13. doi: 10.1161/01.res.60.1.1.
This review leads us to a number of conclusions and suggestions for further study. First, we find wide differences in the meaning of flow heterogeneity, arising as a result of the different methods used. These differences will have to be reconciled to form a comprehensive view of the role of heterogeneity in determining vascular function. Second, in the future, the meaning of heterogeneity must be clearly defined and related to a particular microvascular component, and it is imperative that the differences in scale of heterogeneity be appreciated when comparing data from various laboratories. These heterogeneities have different implications for function, and failure to distinguish among them leads to confusion. Third, the degree to which perfusion heterogeneity is regulated in the microcirculation remains in doubt. Reports of variations in flow heterogeneity in response to physiological stimuli are for the most part based on highly questionable indirect methods. Fourth, the heterogeneity that can be demonstrated at the capillary level within striated muscle does not appear to be large relative to the capacity for the microcirculation to exchange most diffusible solutes. Thus, the inferences regarding heterogeneity, as evidenced by diffusible indicators, are likely to be the result of different preparations, damage to the preparations, or perhaps large-scale heterogeneities in the tissue. An alternate possibility would be that the heterogeneity occurs at the microvascular level but reflects some other aspect of microcirculatory function, such as length or hematocrit heterogeneities, but not flow heterogeneities. Fifth, flow heterogeneity within microvessels implies important consequences for capillary exchange and tissue oxygenation. Heterogeneities of velocity of a magnitude comparable to those observed by direct visualization of microcirculation can clearly produce reductions in oxygen supply to small tissue regions of a degree that may limit oxygen delivery, and thereby, tissue function. Sixth, flow heterogeneity may also influence capillary hematocrit and/or red cell spacing by producing cell separation at bifurcations and a resultant reduction in mean capillary tube hematocrit. There is as yet no agreement on why and how these hematocrits influence tissue oxygenation and function. Although several hypotheses are advanced to explain the distribution of blood flow and red cells within microcirculation, each lacks a critical experimental test at present.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
这篇综述使我们得出了一些结论以及对进一步研究的建议。首先,我们发现由于所使用的方法不同,血流异质性的含义存在很大差异。必须调和这些差异,以便形成关于异质性在决定血管功能中作用的全面观点。其次,未来必须明确界定异质性的含义,并将其与特定的微血管成分相关联,而且在比较不同实验室的数据时,必须认识到异质性规模的差异。这些异质性对功能有不同的影响,未能区分它们会导致混乱。第三,微循环中灌注异质性的调节程度仍不确定。关于血流异质性对生理刺激反应变化的报道大多基于极不可靠的间接方法。第四,相对于微循环交换大多数可扩散溶质的能力而言,在横纹肌内毛细血管水平可证明的异质性似乎并不大。因此,由可扩散指示剂证明的关于异质性的推断可能是不同制备方法、制备损伤或组织中大规模异质性的结果。另一种可能性是异质性发生在微血管水平,但反映了微循环功能的其他方面,如长度或血细胞比容异质性,而非血流异质性。第五,微血管内的血流异质性对毛细血管交换和组织氧合具有重要影响。与通过微循环直接可视化观察到的速度异质性相当的程度,显然会导致小组织区域的氧气供应减少,其程度可能会限制氧气输送,进而影响组织功能。第六,血流异质性还可能通过在分支处产生细胞分离以及由此导致的平均毛细血管管血细胞比容降低,来影响毛细血管血细胞比容和/或红细胞间距。关于这些血细胞比容为何以及如何影响组织氧合和功能,目前尚无定论。尽管提出了几种假说来解释微循环内血流和红细胞的分布,但目前每种假说都缺乏关键的实验验证。(摘要截选至400字)