These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The physiological effects of hydrostatic pressure are not equivalent to those of helium pressure on Rana pipiens.
    Author: Dodson BA, Furmaniuk ZW, Miller KW.
    Journal: J Physiol; 1985 May; 362():233-44. PubMed ID: 3874954.
    Abstract:
    The effects of helium pressure and hydrostatic pressure on Rana pipiens were compared. Both agents caused paralysis at pressures greater than 135 atmospheres (1 atm = 101.325 kPa), but the median pressure for hydrostatic-pressure-induced paralysis was 35 atm less than that for helium pressure. When the ability of both pressurizing agents to reverse urethane-induced anaesthesia was compared, it was found that hydrostatic pressure raised the median dose for anaesthesia 2.2-fold more per atmosphere than did helium pressure. Animals that were lightly anaesthetized by urethane at 110 atm hydrostatic pressure became more deeply anaesthetized when helium was admitted isobarically into the pressure chamber. This difference in depth of anaesthesia between hydrostatic pressure and helium pressure is consistent with helium possessing an inherent anaesthetic effect. The abilities of other gases to pressure-reverse urethane anaesthesia were also determined. The degree of attenuation of the full pressure reversal effect observed with hydrostatic pressure was proportional to the lipid solubility of the gases, increasing in the order helium, neon, hydrogen, nitrogen and argon. Our data on the difference between hydrostatic and helium pressure are consistent with the critical volume hypothesis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]