Harrison M H
Physiol Rev. 1985 Jan;65(1):149-209. doi: 10.1152/physrev.1985.65.1.149.
The opening remarks of this review emphasize, somewhat pessimistically, the serious disagreements, going back over a hundred years, between different investigators regarding effects of exercise and thermal stress on intravascular volume. However, the concluding remarks may legitimately assume a more optimistic, positive aspect, and a certain degree of order and sense may be brought to what had superficially appeared to be the chaos and confusion of conflicting observations and conclusions. Krebs and Meyer's (162) "marked differences in findings between one investigator and another," and Senay's (245) comment 77 years later that "disagreements abound" can now be seen as an inevitable consequence of the widely differing experimental protocols and procedures that have been adopted. Of particular importance in this respect is the failure to standardize conditions before subjects are exposed to thermal stress or begin to exercise--notably in terms of posture and environmental temperature; both may profoundly influence blood volume responses, quantitatively and qualitatively. Then there is subject status; physical fitness, heat acclimatization, and dehydration are important factors contributing to the variability of individual responses to thermal stress and exercise. With the causes of disagreement at least identified, it is now possible to answer the question posed in section I: Is thermal- and exercise-induced hemoconcentration fact or fantasy? Undeniably it is fact, but only under certain circumstances. For example, in resting subjects reduction in blood volume is associated only with high environmental temperatures above the upper limit of the prescriptive zone; within the upper part of the zone, blood volume commonly increases. If heat exposure is preceded by a control period in a cool environment, transient hemodilution is generally observed, followed by hemoconcentration after entry into the heat as skin temperature rises, cutaneous blood flow increases, and sweating begins. Exercise too causes hemoconcentration, but only if the exercise is performed in a supine or seated, not in an upright (standing), position. Hence cycling is almost always associated with a reduction in plasma volume, as is arm exercise and swimming. Bench stepping, walking, and running, on the other hand, are associated with an extremely variable intravascular volume response. If allowance is made for the reduction in plasma volume that occurs when moving to an upright position from a supine or seated position, the initial rapid hemoconcentration seen at the onset of cycling exercise is absent with bench stepping, walking, and running.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
本综述的开篇评论有些悲观地强调,在过去一百多年里,不同研究者在运动和热应激对血管内容量的影响方面存在严重分歧。然而,结论部分可以合理地呈现出更乐观、积极的一面,并且可以给表面上看似混乱且相互冲突的观察结果和结论带来一定程度的条理和意义。克雷布斯和迈耶(162)所说的“不同研究者之间结果存在显著差异”,以及77年后森纳伊(245)评论的“分歧众多”,现在可以被视为采用了广泛不同的实验方案和程序所带来的必然结果。在这方面特别重要的是,在受试者暴露于热应激或开始运动之前未能对条件进行标准化——尤其是姿势和环境温度方面;这两者在数量和质量上都可能深刻影响血容量反应。然后是受试者的状态;身体素质、热适应和脱水是导致个体对热应激和运动反应变异性的重要因素。至少在确定了分歧的原因之后,现在可以回答第一节提出的问题了:热应激和运动引起的血液浓缩是事实还是幻想?不可否认,这是事实,但仅在某些情况下。例如,在静息受试者中,血容量减少仅与高于规定区域上限的高环境温度有关;在该区域的上部,血容量通常会增加。如果在热暴露之前有一个在凉爽环境中的对照期,通常会观察到短暂的血液稀释,随后随着皮肤温度升高、皮肤血流量增加和出汗开始,进入热环境后会出现血液浓缩。运动也会导致血液浓缩,但前提是运动是在仰卧或坐姿下进行,而不是直立(站立)姿势。因此,骑自行车几乎总是与血浆容量减少有关,手臂运动和游泳也是如此。另一方面,台阶试验、步行和跑步与血管内容量反应的变化极大有关。如果考虑到从仰卧或坐姿转变为直立姿势时发生的血浆容量减少,那么在台阶试验、步行和跑步时就不会出现骑自行车运动开始时最初快速的血液浓缩现象。(摘要截选至400字)