Does respiratory drive modify the cerebral vascular response to changes in end-tidal carbon dioxide?

NEW FINDINGS: What is the central question of this study? There is an interaction between the regulatory systems of respiration and cerebral blood flow, because the mediator (CO2 ) is the same for both physiological systems. We examined whether the traditional method for determining cerebrovascular reactivity to CO2 is modified by changes in respiration. What is the main finding and its importance? Cerebrovascular reactivity was modified by voluntary changes in respiration during hypercapnia. This finding suggests that an alteration in the respiratory system may result in under- or overestimation of cerebrovascular reactivity determined by traditional methods in healthy adults. ABSTRACT: The cerebral vasculature is sensitive to changes in the arterial partial pressure of CO2 . This physiological mechanism has been well established as a cerebrovascular reactivity to CO2 (CVR). However, arterial CO2 may not be an independent variable in the traditional method for assessment of CVR, because the cerebral blood flow response is also affected by the activation of respiratory drive or higher centres in the brain. We hypothesized that CVR is modified by changes in respiration. To test our hypothesis, in the present study, 10 young, healthy subjects performed hyper- or hypoventilation to change end-tidal CO2 ( PET,CO2 ) with different concentrations of CO2 in the inhaled gas (0, 2.0 and 3.5%). We measured middle cerebral artery mean blood flow velocity by transcranial Doppler ultrasonography to identify the cerebral blood flow response to change in PET,CO2 during each set of conditions. In each set of conditions, PET,CO2 was significantly altered by changes in ventilation, and middle cerebral artery mean blood flow velocity changed accordingly. However, the relationship between changes in middle cerebral artery mean blood flow velocity and PET,CO2 as a response curve of CVR was reset upwards and downwards by hypo- and hyperventilation, respectively, compared with CVR during normal ventilation. The findings of the present study suggest the possibility that an alteration in respiration might lead to under- or overestimation of CVR determined by the traditional methods.

Acute hyperglycemia does not affect central respiratory chemoreflex responsiveness to CO2 in healthy humans.

The central respiratory chemoreceptor complex (CCRC) is comprised of brainstem neurons and surrounding interoceptors, which collectively increase ventilation in response to elevated brainstem tissue CO2/[H+] (i.e., central chemoreflex; CCR). The extent that the CCRC detects/responds to other metabolically related chemostimuli is unknown. We aimed to test the effects of acute oral glucose ingestion on CCR reactivity in heathy human participants (n = 38). We instrumented participants with a pneumotachometer (minute ventilation) and a gas sample line connected to a dual gas analyzer (pressure of end-tidal CO2). Following a baseline (BL) period and capillary blood [glucose] (BG) sample, fasted (F) participants underwent a modified hyperoxic rebreathing test to assess CCR reactivity. Participants then consumed a 75 g standard glucose beverage (glucose loaded; GL). Following 30-min, they underwent a second BL, BG sample and hyperoxic rebreathing test. BG and metabolic rate were higher in GL, confirming the metabolic stimulus. However, the ventilatory recruitment threshold and the CCR responses were unchanged between F and GL states.

Intra-individual variability in cerebrovascular and respiratory chemosensitivity: Can we characterize a chemoreflex "reactivity profile"?

Intra-individual variability in the magnitude of human cerebrovascular and respiratory chemoreflex responses is largely unexplored. By comparing response magnitudes of cerebrovascular CO2 reactivity (CVR; middle and posterior cerebral arteries; MCA, PCA), central (CCR; CO2) and peripheral respiratory chemoreflexes (PCR; CO2 and O2), we tested the hypothesis that a within-individual reactivity magnitude profile could be characterized. The magnitudes of CVR and CCR were tested with hyperoxic rebreathing and PCR magnitudes were tested through transient respiratory tests (TT-CO2, hypercapnia; TT-N2, hypoxia). No significant intra-individual relationships were found between CCR vs. CVR (MCA and PCA), CCR vs. PCR (TT-N2 or TT-CO2) (r<0.2, P>0.3) response magnitudes. Statistically significant relationships were found between MCA vs. PCA reactivity (r=0.45, P<0.01) and PCR TT-N2 vs. PCR TT-CO2 (r=0.79, P<0.001) responses. Using qualitative and quantitative comparisons, we conclude that an intra-individual chemoreflex reactivity magnitude profile cannot be characterized. These data highlight the considerable between- and within-individual variability that exists in human cerebrovascular and respiratory chemoreflexes.

The effects of head-up and head-down tilt on central respiratory chemoreflex loop gain tested by hyperoxic rebreathing.

Central respiratory chemosensitivity is mediated via chemoreceptor neurons located throughout brain stem tissue. These receptors detect proximal CO2/[H(+)] (i.e., controller gain) and modulate breathing in a classic negative feedback loop. Loop gain (responsiveness) is the theoretical product of controller (chemoreceptors), mixing/feedback (cardiovascular and cerebrovascular systems), and plant (pulmonary system) gains. The level of chemoreceptor stimulation is determined by interactions between mixing and plant gains. The extent to which steady-state changes in body position may affect central chemoreflex loop gain in response to CO2 is unclear. Because of the potential effects of tilt on pulmonary mechanics, we hypothesized that plant gain would be altered by head-up and head-down tilt (HUT, HDT) during hyperoxic rebreathing, which theoretically isolates plant gain by eliminating systemic arterial-tissue gradients. Sixteen subjects (eight females) underwent hyperoxic rebreathing tests on a tilt table to quantify central chemoreflex loop gain in five steady-state positions: 90° HUT, 45° HUT, supine, 45° HDT, and 90° HDT. Respiratory responses (tidal volume, VT; frequency, fR; minute ventilation, VE) were quantified during steady-state and increases in CO2 during rebreathing by linear regression above the ventilatory recruitment threshold (VRT). Using one-factor analysis of variance, we found that there were no differences in the respiratory responses between the five positions (VRT, P=0.711; VT, P=0.290; fR, P=0.748; VE, P=0.325). Our findings suggest that during steady-state orthostatic stress, the ability of subjects to mount a normal ventilatory response to increased CO2 was unaffected, despite any potential changes in pulmonary mechanics associated with positional challenges.