Methodological assessment of skin and limb blood flows in the human forearm during thermal and baroreceptor provocations

R. Matthew Brothers, Jonathan E. Wingo, Kimberly A. Hubing, Craig G. Crandall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Skin blood flow responses in the human forearm, assessed by three commonly used technologies-single-point laser-Doppler flowmetry, integrated laser-Doppler flowmetry, and laser-Doppler imaging-were compared in eight subjects during normothermic baseline, acute skin-surface cooling, and whole body heat stress (Δ internal temperature = 1.0 ± 0.2°C; P < 0.001). In addition, while normothermic and heat stressed, subjects were exposed to 30-mmHg lower-body negative pressure (LBNP). Skin blood flow was normalized to the maximum value obtained at each site during local heating to 42°C for at least 30 min. Furthermore, comparisons of forearm blood flow (FBF) measures obtained using venous occlusion plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound were made during the aforementioned perturbations. Relative to normothermic baseline, skin blood flow decreased during normothermia + LBNP (P < 0.05) and skin-surface cooling (P < 0.01) and increased during whole body heating (P < 0.001). Subsequent LBNP during whole body heating significantly decreased skin blood flow relative to control heat stress (P < 0.05). Importantly, for each of the aforementioned conditions, skin blood flow was similar between the three measurement devices (main effect of device: P > 0.05 for all conditions). Similarly, no differences were identified across all perturbations between FBF measures using plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound (P > 0.05 for all perturbations). These data indicate that when normalized to maximum, assessment of skin blood flow in response to vasoconstrictor and dilator perturbations are similar regardless of methodology. Likewise, FBF responses to these perturbations are similar between two commonly used methodologies of limb blood flow assessment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)895-900
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Applied Physiology
Volume109
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2010

Fingerprint

Pressoreceptors
Forearm
Laser-Doppler Flowmetry
Extremities
Hot Temperature
Skin
Doppler Ultrasonography
Plethysmography
Vasoconstrictor Agents
Lasers
Technology
Temperature

Keywords

  • Blood flow
  • Heat stress
  • Laser-Doppler flowmetry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

Methodological assessment of skin and limb blood flows in the human forearm during thermal and baroreceptor provocations. / Brothers, R. Matthew; Wingo, Jonathan E.; Hubing, Kimberly A.; Crandall, Craig G.

In: Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol. 109, No. 3, 09.2010, p. 895-900.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bcb2299b61034faeb715704d2e9148f6,
title = "Methodological assessment of skin and limb blood flows in the human forearm during thermal and baroreceptor provocations",
abstract = "Skin blood flow responses in the human forearm, assessed by three commonly used technologies-single-point laser-Doppler flowmetry, integrated laser-Doppler flowmetry, and laser-Doppler imaging-were compared in eight subjects during normothermic baseline, acute skin-surface cooling, and whole body heat stress (Δ internal temperature = 1.0 ± 0.2°C; P < 0.001). In addition, while normothermic and heat stressed, subjects were exposed to 30-mmHg lower-body negative pressure (LBNP). Skin blood flow was normalized to the maximum value obtained at each site during local heating to 42°C for at least 30 min. Furthermore, comparisons of forearm blood flow (FBF) measures obtained using venous occlusion plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound were made during the aforementioned perturbations. Relative to normothermic baseline, skin blood flow decreased during normothermia + LBNP (P < 0.05) and skin-surface cooling (P < 0.01) and increased during whole body heating (P < 0.001). Subsequent LBNP during whole body heating significantly decreased skin blood flow relative to control heat stress (P < 0.05). Importantly, for each of the aforementioned conditions, skin blood flow was similar between the three measurement devices (main effect of device: P > 0.05 for all conditions). Similarly, no differences were identified across all perturbations between FBF measures using plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound (P > 0.05 for all perturbations). These data indicate that when normalized to maximum, assessment of skin blood flow in response to vasoconstrictor and dilator perturbations are similar regardless of methodology. Likewise, FBF responses to these perturbations are similar between two commonly used methodologies of limb blood flow assessment.",
keywords = "Blood flow, Heat stress, Laser-Doppler flowmetry",
author = "Brothers, {R. Matthew} and Wingo, {Jonathan E.} and Hubing, {Kimberly A.} and Crandall, {Craig G.}",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1152/japplphysiol.00319.2010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "109",
pages = "895--900",
journal = "Journal of Applied Physiology",
issn = "0161-7567",
publisher = "American Physiological Society",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methodological assessment of skin and limb blood flows in the human forearm during thermal and baroreceptor provocations

AU - Brothers, R. Matthew

AU - Wingo, Jonathan E.

AU - Hubing, Kimberly A.

AU - Crandall, Craig G.

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - Skin blood flow responses in the human forearm, assessed by three commonly used technologies-single-point laser-Doppler flowmetry, integrated laser-Doppler flowmetry, and laser-Doppler imaging-were compared in eight subjects during normothermic baseline, acute skin-surface cooling, and whole body heat stress (Δ internal temperature = 1.0 ± 0.2°C; P < 0.001). In addition, while normothermic and heat stressed, subjects were exposed to 30-mmHg lower-body negative pressure (LBNP). Skin blood flow was normalized to the maximum value obtained at each site during local heating to 42°C for at least 30 min. Furthermore, comparisons of forearm blood flow (FBF) measures obtained using venous occlusion plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound were made during the aforementioned perturbations. Relative to normothermic baseline, skin blood flow decreased during normothermia + LBNP (P < 0.05) and skin-surface cooling (P < 0.01) and increased during whole body heating (P < 0.001). Subsequent LBNP during whole body heating significantly decreased skin blood flow relative to control heat stress (P < 0.05). Importantly, for each of the aforementioned conditions, skin blood flow was similar between the three measurement devices (main effect of device: P > 0.05 for all conditions). Similarly, no differences were identified across all perturbations between FBF measures using plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound (P > 0.05 for all perturbations). These data indicate that when normalized to maximum, assessment of skin blood flow in response to vasoconstrictor and dilator perturbations are similar regardless of methodology. Likewise, FBF responses to these perturbations are similar between two commonly used methodologies of limb blood flow assessment.

AB - Skin blood flow responses in the human forearm, assessed by three commonly used technologies-single-point laser-Doppler flowmetry, integrated laser-Doppler flowmetry, and laser-Doppler imaging-were compared in eight subjects during normothermic baseline, acute skin-surface cooling, and whole body heat stress (Δ internal temperature = 1.0 ± 0.2°C; P < 0.001). In addition, while normothermic and heat stressed, subjects were exposed to 30-mmHg lower-body negative pressure (LBNP). Skin blood flow was normalized to the maximum value obtained at each site during local heating to 42°C for at least 30 min. Furthermore, comparisons of forearm blood flow (FBF) measures obtained using venous occlusion plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound were made during the aforementioned perturbations. Relative to normothermic baseline, skin blood flow decreased during normothermia + LBNP (P < 0.05) and skin-surface cooling (P < 0.01) and increased during whole body heating (P < 0.001). Subsequent LBNP during whole body heating significantly decreased skin blood flow relative to control heat stress (P < 0.05). Importantly, for each of the aforementioned conditions, skin blood flow was similar between the three measurement devices (main effect of device: P > 0.05 for all conditions). Similarly, no differences were identified across all perturbations between FBF measures using plethysmography and Doppler ultrasound (P > 0.05 for all perturbations). These data indicate that when normalized to maximum, assessment of skin blood flow in response to vasoconstrictor and dilator perturbations are similar regardless of methodology. Likewise, FBF responses to these perturbations are similar between two commonly used methodologies of limb blood flow assessment.

KW - Blood flow

KW - Heat stress

KW - Laser-Doppler flowmetry

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957160352&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957160352&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1152/japplphysiol.00319.2010

DO - 10.1152/japplphysiol.00319.2010

M3 - Article

C2 - 20634360

AN - SCOPUS:77957160352

VL - 109

SP - 895

EP - 900

JO - Journal of Applied Physiology

JF - Journal of Applied Physiology

SN - 0161-7567

IS - 3

ER -