Journal of Applied Physiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Appl Physiol (February 21, 2003). doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00924.2002
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
94/6/2289    most recent
00924.2002v1
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Series, F.
Right arrow Articles by Ethier, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Series, F.
Right arrow Articles by Ethier, G.
Submitted on October 8, 2002
Accepted on February 17, 2003

Assessment of upper airway stabilizing forces using phrenic nerve stimulation in conscious humans

Frederic Series1* and Germain Ethier1

1 Medicine, Laval University, Quebec, Quebec, Canada

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: frederic.series{at}med.ulaval.ca.

Phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) applied at end-expiration allows the investigation of passive upper airway (UA) dynamic during wakefulness. Assuming that phasic UA dilating/satbilizing forces should modify the UA properties when twitches are applied during inspiration, we compared the UA dynamic responses to expiratory and inspiratory twitches (2 s and 200 ms after expiratory and inspiratory onset respectively) in 9 men (mean age 28 y). This procedure was repeated with a 2 cm mouth opening provided with a closed mouthpiece. The percentage of flow-limited (FL) twitches was significantly higher when PNS were realized during expiration than inspiration. VImax of FL twitches was significantly higher for inspiratory twitches (1383 ± 42 ml.s-1 and 1185 ± 40). With mouth aperture VImax decreased with an increase in the corresponding pharyngeal resistance values, and the % of twitch with a FL regimen increased but only for inspiratory twitches. We conclude that 1) UA dynamics is significantly influenced by the inspiratory/expiratory timing at which PNS is applied, 2) the improvement in UA dynamic properties observed from expiratory to inspiratory PNS characterizes the overall inspiratory stabilizing effects, and 3) mouth aperture alters the stability of UA structures during inspiration.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Exp PhysiolHome page
F. Series, W. Wang, C. Melot, and T. Similowski
Concomitant responses of upper airway stabilizing muscles to transcranial magnetic stimulation in normal men
Exp Physiol, April 1, 2008; 93(4): 496 - 502.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 1966 by the American Physiological Society.