Journal of Applied Physiology http://www.adinstruments.com/labchart/faseb
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Appl Physiol 70: 889-894, 1991;
8750-7587/91 $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 Duara, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bancalari, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Duara, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bancalari, E.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 70, Issue 2 889-894, Copyright © 1991 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Assessment of airway resistance in preterm infants during incremental inspiratory flow-resistive loading

S. Duara, T. Gerhardt and E. Bancalari
Department of Pediatrics, University of Miami School of Medicine, Florida 33101.

Extrathoracic airway (ETA) stability was tested by inspiratory flow-resistive loading in 10 preterm infants to determine whether ETA collapsibility was directly related to the size of the added load. A fall in intraluminal pressure was produced by applying two inspiratory flow-resistive loads of lower (L1) and higher (L2) magnitudes. An increase in intrinsic resistance was used as an index of upper airway collapsibility. Total pulmonary resistance did not change from baseline with L1 (73 +/- 26 to 71 +/- 25 cmH2O.l-1.s) but increased significantly with L2 (72 +/- 21 to 99 +/- 34 cmH2O.l-1.s, P less than 0.02) secondary to a rise in inspiratory resistance (55 +/- 21 to 109 +/- 55 cmH2O.l-1.s, P less than 0.05). Expiratory resistance did not change significantly with either load. Proximal airway pressure was more negative with L2 than with L1 in every infant (mean -4.5 +/- 0.6 vs. -3.6 +/- 0.9 cmH2O, P less than 0.05). This study shows that the ETA of preterm infants is pressure passive at high but not at low collapsing pressures, and possible explanations include limited "active" compensation by upper airway dilator muscles and an overwhelming of the "passive" defense offered by the intrinsic rigidity of the ETA to large changes in transmural pressure.





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