Journal of Applied Physiology Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Appl Physiol 58: 1164-1169, 1985;
8750-7587/85 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sekizawa, K.
Right arrow Articles by Takishima, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sekizawa, K.
Right arrow Articles by Takishima, T.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 58, Issue 4 1164-1169, Copyright © 1985 by American Physiological Society

ARTICLES

Laryngeal resistance immediately after panting in control and constricted airways

K. Sekizawa, H. Sasaki and T. Takishima

Laryngeal resistance (Rla) in the postpanting interval (PPRla) was examined in five normal subjects in the control state and with methacholine- and histamine-induced bronchoconstriction. Respiratory resistance (Rrs) was measured by the forced oscillation technique at 10 Hz, and Rla was measured by the low-frequency sound method (Sekizawa, K., C. Shindoh, W. Hida, S. Suzuki, et al. J. Appl. Physiol. 55:591-597, 1983). Inspiratory Rrs (IRrs) was lower than expiratory Rrs (ERrs), and Rrs immediately after panting (PPRrs) was not significantly different from IRrs in the three airway conditions. Rla increased with bronchoconstriction and inspiratory Rla (IRla) was lower than expiratory Rla (ERla). PPRla was lower than IRla (P less than 0.01) by an amount corresponding to the decrease in Rrs in the control airway. However, in constricted airways, PPRla was higher than IRla and about the same as ERla. We suggest that the panting maneuver is suitable for minimizing the effect of laryngeal artifact in the control airway, but in the constricted airway the panting maneuver may fail to cause widening of the laryngeal orifice.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online