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: Diaphragm thickness and mobility elicited by two different modalities of inspiratory muscle loading in heart failure participants: A randomized crossover study.
    Author: Zacarias Rondinel T, Bocchi L, Cipriano Júnior G, Chiappa GRDS, Martins GS, Mateus SRM, Cahalin LP, Cipriano GFB.
    Journal: PLoS One; 2024; 19(5):e0302735. PubMed ID: 38787839.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To analyze diaphragmatic thickness, at end-inspiration and end-expiration, diaphragmatic thickening index and mobility via US under two different modalities of inspiratory muscle loading, in two different modalities of inspiratory muscle loading and different load intensities at full-vital capacity maneuvers and the relationship between diaphragmatic thickness with pulmonary function tests in participants with HF. METHODS: This randomized crossover trial, enrolled with 17 HF subjects, evaluated diaphragm thickness (Tdi, mm), fractional thickness (TFdi, %), and mobility (mm) US during low and high intensities (30% and 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure-MIP) with two modalities of inspiratory muscle loading mechanical threshold loading (MTL) and tapered flow-resistive loading (TFRL). RESULTS: Both MTL and TFRL produced a increase in Tdi, but only with high intensity loading compared to baseline-2.21 (0.26) vs. 2.68 (0.33) and 2.73 (0.44) mm; p = .01. TFdi was greater than baseline under all conditions, except during low intensity of TFRL. Diaphragm mobility was greater than baseline under all conditions, and high intensity of TFRL elicited greater mobility compared to all other conditions. Additionally, baseline Tdi was moderately correlated with pulmonary function tests. CONCLUSIONS: MTL and TFRL modalities elicit similar increases in diaphragm thickness at loads, but only during high intensity loading it was greater than baseline. Diaphragm mobility was significantly greater than baseline under both loads and devices, and at high intensity compared to low intensity, although TFRL produced greater mobility compared to modalities of inspiratory muscle loading. There is an association between diaphragm thickness and pulmonary function tests.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]