Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct;107(4):354-364.
doi: 10.5935/abc.20160135.

Reduced Systolic Volume: Main Pathophysiological Mechanism in Patients with Orthostatic Intolerance?

[Article in Portuguese, English]
Affiliations

Reduced Systolic Volume: Main Pathophysiological Mechanism in Patients with Orthostatic Intolerance?

[Article in Portuguese, English]
Maria Zildany P Távora-Mehta et al. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2016 Oct.

Abstract

Background: Orthostatic intolerance patients' pathophysiological mechanism is still obscure, contributing to the difficulty in their clinical management.

Objective: To investigate hemodynamic changes during tilt test in individuals with orthostatic intolerance symptoms, including syncope or near syncope.

Methods: Sixty-one patients who underwent tilt test at - 70° in the phase without vasodilators were divided into two groups. For data analysis, only the first 20 minutes of tilting were considered. Group I was made up of 33 patients who had an increase of total peripheral vascular resistance (TPVR) during orthostatic position; and Group II was made up of 28 patients with a decrease in TPVR (characterizing insufficient peripheral vascular resistance). The control group consisted of 24 healthy asymptomatic individuals. Hemodynamic parameters were obtained by a non-invasive hemodynamic monitor in three different moments (supine position, tilt 10' and tilt 20') adjusted for age.

Results: In the supine position, systolic volume (SV) was significantly reduced in both Group II and I in comparison to the control group, respectively (66.4 ±14.9 ml vs. 81.8±14.8 ml vs. 101.5±24.2 ml; p<0.05). TPVR, however, was higher in Group II in comparison to Group I and controls, respectively (1750.5± 442 dyne.s/cm5 vs.1424±404 dyne.s/cm5 vs. 974.4±230 dyne.s/cm5; p<0.05). In the orthostatic position, at 10', there was repetition of findings, with lower absolute values of SV compared to controls (64.1±14.0 ml vs 65.5±11.3 ml vs 82.8±15.6 ml; p<0.05). TPVR, on the other hand, showed a relative drop in Group II, in comparison to Group I.

Conclusion: Reduced SV was consistently observed in the groups of patients with orthostatic intolerance in comparison to the control group. Two different responses to tilt test were observed: one group with elevated TPVR and another with a relative drop in TPVR, possibly suggesting a more severe failure of compensation mechanisms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Potential Conflict of Interest No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Non-invasive hemodynamic index monitor records. A) Patient in Group I – observe the compensatory elevation of TPVR index during inclination. B) Patient in Group II – observe the unexpected drop in TPVR during inclination.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A and B) Means and confidence intervals of 95% for SV and CD means adjusted for age: comparison between the groups at each moment of analysis (supine, tilt 10' and tilt 20'). SV: systolic volume; CD: cardiac debit.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Means and confidence intervals of 95% for TPVR means adjusted for age: comparison between the groups at each moment of analysis (supine, tilt 10' and tilt 20').
Figure 4
Figure 4
A and B) Means and confidence intervals of MBP and HR means adjusted for age: comparison between the groups at each moment of analysis (supine, tilt 10' and tilt 20'). MBP: mean blood pressure; HR: heart rate.
Figure 5
Figure 5
a (Group I), b (Group II) and c (Control group). Scatter diagrams for SV and TPVR at 10' during tilt test; r: Pearson correlation coefficient. SV: systolic volume;TPVR: total peripheral vascular resistance.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kanjuwal K, Sheikh M, Karabin B, Kanjwal Y, Grubb BP. Neurocardiogenic syncope coexisting with postural orthostatic syndrome in patients suffering from orthostatic intolerance: a combined form of autonomic disfunction. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2011;34(5):549–554. - PubMed
    1. Medow MS, Stewart JM. The postural tachycardia syndrome. Cardiol Rev. 2007;15(2):67–75. - PubMed
    1. Fucà G, Dinelli M, Sazzani P, Scarfo S, Tossinari F, Alboni P. The venous system is the main determinant of Hypotension in patients with vasovagal syncope. Europace. 2006;8(10):839–845. - PubMed
    1. Nilsson D, Sutton R, Tas W, Burri P, Melgarder U, Federowski A. Orthostatic changes in hemodynamics in dysautonomic patients. Plos One. 2015;10(6):e0128962. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Parsaik A, Allison TG, Singer W, Sletten DM, Joynes MJ, Benarroch EE, et al. Deconditioning in patients with orthostatic intolerance. Neurology. 2012;79(14):1435–1439. - PMC - PubMed