首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>The Journal of Physiology >Lack of linear correlation between dynamic and steady‐state cerebral autoregulation
【2h】

Lack of linear correlation between dynamic and steady‐state cerebral autoregulation

机译:动态和稳态脑自动调节之间缺乏线性关系

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Key points class="unordered" style="list-style-type:disc" id="tjp12472-list-0001">For correct application and interpretation of cerebral autoregulation (CA) measurements in research and in clinical care, it is essential to understand differences and similarities between dynamic and steady‐state CA.The present study found no correlation between dynamic and steady‐state CA indices in healthy older adults.There was variability between individuals in all (steady‐state and dynamic) autoregulatory indices, ranging from low (almost absent) to highly efficient CA in this healthy population.These findings challenge the assumption that assessment of a single CA parameter or a single set of parameters can be generalized to overall CA functioning. Therefore, depending on specific research purposes, the choice for either steady‐state or dynamic measures or both should be weighed carefully.
机译:关键点 class =“ unordered” style =“ list-style-type:disc” id =“ tjp12472-list-0001”> <!-list-behavior = unordered prefix-word = mark-type = disc max- label-size = 0-> 要在研究和临床护理中正确应用和解释脑自动调节(CA)测量,必须了解动态和稳态CA之间的异同。 本研究发现健康老年人的动态和稳态CA指数之间没有相关性。 在所有(稳态和动态)自动调节指数中,个体之间存在差异,范围从低(在这个健康的人群中,几乎没有高效的CA。 这些发现挑战了这样一个假设,即可以将单个CA参数或一组参数的评估推广到整个CA功能。因此,应根据特定的研究目的,仔细权衡选择稳态或动态测量方法,或同时选择两者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号