Journal of Applied Physiology AJP: Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Appl Physiol 66: 997-1002, 1989;
8750-7587/89 $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 Braam, B.
Right arrow Articles by Berckmans, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Braam, B.
Right arrow Articles by Berckmans, R.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 66, Issue 2 997-1002, Copyright © 1989 by American Physiological Society

ARTICLES

Pitfalls of venous occlusion method for determination of capillary pressure in humans

B. Braam, H. A. Koomans, T. J. Rabelink and R. Berckmans
Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Hospital Utrecht, The Netherlands.

We tested the method of estimating capillary pressure from venous pressure transients obtained after sudden venous clamping in a hydrodynamic model. The basic principles were confirmed in the model, but it was found that when occlusion was caused over a relatively wide distance or in a predistended vessel, capillary pressure was overrated. This problem was due to volume backflow from the occlusion site, since it could be eliminated by placing a one-way valve upstream from the occlusion site. Upstream from the valve, the venous pressure transient accurately followed capillary pressure. Downstream, however, the reading of capillary pressure was impaired by the backflow volume squeezed between valve and occlusion clamp, which caused an immediate large pressure elevation. We also tested the method recently advanced to estimate capillary pressure in humans from venous pressure curves obtained after rapid venous occlusion with an air-filled compression cuff. With the cuff around the upper arm, venous pressure was recorded at different levels along the forearm. The tracings obtained from the dorsum of the hand and halfway along the forearm did not show the initial rapid upstrokes that might indicate the capillary pressure. Tracings obtained slightly below or above the cubital fossa were similar to those seen downstream from the one-way valve in the model. Extrapolation to zero-time, using the distally recorded curves as a template, yielded values equal to venous pressure. We conclude that although the problem of backflow can be circumvented by pressure recording distal from venous valves, the method of venous occlusion by a circular upper-arm cuff may not be appropriate to estimate capillary pressure in humans.




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