Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Exp Physiol. 2024 Mar;109(3):393-404. doi: 10.1113/EP091146. Epub 2023 Nov 20.
At the start of a moderate-intensity square-wave exercise, after a short delay, breath-by-breath O uptake at the mouth is approximated to a mono-exponential function, whose time constant is considered matched to that of the O uptake of the working muscles. We compared the kinetic parameters obtained from the breath-by-breath gas exchange data yielded by the 'Independent-breath' algorithm (IND), which accounts for the changes in lung gas stores, with those obtained with the classical 'Expiration-only' algorithm (EXP). The two algorithms were applied on the same flow and gas fraction traces acquired on 10 healthy volunteers, performing 10 times the same moderate-intensity exercise transition. Repeated O uptake responses were stacked together and the kinetic parameters of a mono-exponential function were estimated by non-linear regression, removing the data pertaining to 1-s progressively longer initial periods (ΔT ). Independently of ΔT , the mean response time (time constant + time delay) obtained for the IND data was faster compared to the EXP data (∼43 s vs. ∼47 s, P < 0.001), essentially because of shorter time delays. Between ΔT = 16 s and ΔT = 29s, the time constants of the IND data decreased (30.7 s vs. 28.0 s, P < 0.05; drop = 10%), but less than those of the EXP data (32.2 s vs. 26.2 s, P < 0.001; drop = 23%); with the same ΔT , the time constants of the two algorithms' data were not different (P > 0.07). The different decrease in the time constant, together with the different mean response time, suggests that the data yielded by the two algorithms provide a different picture of the phenomena occurring at the beginning of the exercise.
在中等强度方波运动开始时,经过短暂的延迟,口呼吸 O 摄取量近似于单指数函数,其时间常数被认为与工作肌肉的 O 摄取量相匹配。我们比较了“独立呼吸”算法(IND)产生的呼吸气体交换数据的动力学参数,该算法考虑了肺气体储存的变化,与经典的“仅呼气”算法(EXP)获得的参数进行了比较。两种算法应用于 10 名健康志愿者在进行相同中等强度运动过渡时采集的相同流量和气体分数迹线上。将重复的 O 摄取反应叠加在一起,并通过非线性回归估计单指数函数的动力学参数,去除与 1 秒逐渐更长初始期(ΔT)有关的数据。与 EXP 数据相比,无论ΔT如何,IND 数据的平均响应时间(时间常数+时间延迟)都更快(∼43 s 与 ∼47 s,P<0.001),主要是由于时间延迟较短。在ΔT=16 s 和 ΔT=29 s 之间,IND 数据的时间常数减小(30.7 s 与 28.0 s,P<0.05;下降=10%),但小于 EXP 数据的时间常数(32.2 s 与 26.2 s,P<0.001;下降=23%);对于相同的ΔT,两种算法数据的时间常数没有差异(P>0.07)。时间常数的不同减小以及平均响应时间的不同表明,两种算法产生的数据提供了运动开始时发生的现象的不同画面。