↓ Skip to main content

Physiological Mechanisms Mediating the Coupling between Heart Period and Arterial Pressure in Response to Postural Changes in Humans

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Physiological Mechanisms Mediating the Coupling between Heart Period and Arterial Pressure in Response to Postural Changes in Humans
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00163
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandro Silvani, Giovanna Calandra-Buonaura, Blair D. Johnson, Noud van Helmond, Giorgio Barletta, Anna G. Cecere, Michael J. Joyner, Pietro Cortelli

Abstract

The upright posture strengthens the coupling between heart period (HP) and systolic arterial pressure (SAP) consistently with a greater contribution of the arterial baroreflex to cardiac control, while paradoxically decreasing cardiac baroreflex sensitivity (cBRS). To investigate the physiological mechanisms that mediate the coupling between HP and SAP in response to different postures, we analyzed the cross-correlation functions between low-frequency HP and SAP fluctuations and estimated cBRS with the sequence technique in healthy male subjects during passive head-up tilt test (HUTT, n = 58), during supine wakefulness, supine slow-wave sleep (SWS), and in the seated and active standing positions (n = 8), and during progressive loss of 1 L blood (n = 8) to decrease central venous pressure in the supine position. HUTT, SWS, the seated, and the standing positions, but not blood loss, entailed significant increases in the positive correlation between HP and the previous SAP values, which is the expected result of arterial baroreflex control, compared with baseline recordings in the supine position during wakefulness. These increases were mirrored by increases in the low-frequency variability of SAP in each condition but SWS. cBRS decreased significantly during HUTT, in the seated and standing positions, and after blood loss compared with baseline during wakefulness. These decreases were mirrored by decreases in the RMSSD index, which reflects cardiac vagal modulation. These results support the view that the cBRS decrease associated with the upright posture is a byproduct of decreased cardiac vagal modulation, triggered by the arterial baroreflex in response to central hypovolemia. Conversely, the greater baroreflex contribution to cardiac control associated with upright posture may be explained, at least in part, by enhanced fluctuations of SAP, which elicit a more effective entrainment of HP fluctuations by the arterial baroreflex. These SAP fluctuations may result from enhanced fluctuations of vascular resistance specific to the upright posture, and not be driven by the accompanying central hypovolemia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Professor 4 8%
Other 13 25%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 21%
Engineering 7 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 11 21%
Unknown 15 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,884,576
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#7,203
of 13,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,751
of 308,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#134
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 218 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.