Baroreflex (BR) is one of the most important mechanisms in short-term regulation of arterial pressure (AP) (Robertson et al., 2012). The BR has a key role in limiting excessive AP rises via the activation of a vagal reflex (Robertson et al., 2012) producing several consequences on physiological variables. The most frequently evaluated consequence is the lengthening of heart period (HP) (Pickering et al., 1972). Baroreflex is crucial in bipedal animals like humans to prevent AP drops while standing via a sympathetic activation eliciting the HP shortening (Montano et al., 1994; Cooke et al., 1999; Marchi et al., 2016; De Maria et al., 2018) and the increase of burst rate of integrated postganglionic efferent sympathetic nerve activity directed to muscles (Sundlof and Wallin, 1978; Cooke et al., 1999; Furlan et al., 2000; Marchi et al., 2016). The BR engagement limits excessive AP variability in both humans and animals (Bertinieri et al., 1988; Parati et al., 1988; Frankel et al., 1993; Porta et al., 2000; Fazan et al., 2005).
The clinical evaluation of the BR control started with Smyth et al. (1969) who provided a practical, even though invasive, way to characterize BR via the estimate of the baroreflex sensitivity (BRS), namely the magnitude of HP changes observed in response to a pharmacologically induced unit variation of systolic AP (SAP). This interventional method is predictive for clinical outcomes (La Rovere et al., 1998) but, as it is inherently both non-physiological and invasive, researchers proposed noninvasive, non-interventional, and non-pharmacological surrogate techniques based on spontaneous fluctuations of HP and SAP with the aim at enlarging and favoring clinical applications (Laude et al., 2004). Both interventional and non-interventional techniques made the BR assessment popular but they contributed to form the common belief that BR is coincident with its cardiac arm operating to keep AP constant via HP adjustments. However, cardiac BR (cBR) is neither the unique arm of the BR nor the most important one, given that recent heart transplanted patients can stand up (Smith et al., 1989; Karemaker and Wesseling, 2008) and technologies for baroreflex failure target directly vasomotor sympathetic nerves (Hosokawa and Sunagawa, 2016). One of the consequences of the view identifying the BR with cBR is the tendency of interpreting modifications of the mean AP experienced during everyday life in spite of homeostatic characteristic of the BR as a result of its noisy nature (Karemaker and Wesseling, 2008). Conversely, the stochastic nature of the BR might be the simple consequence of its complex and composite nature: indeed, since the BR can target several physiological variables including heart rate, sympathetic activity, peripheral resistances, cardiac contractility, and stroke volume just to mention a few (Smyth et al., 1969; Sundlof and Wallin, 1978; Casadei et al., 1992; Kienbaum et al., 2001; Yasumasu et al., 2005; Vaschillo et al., 2012; Borgers et al., 2014; Barbic et al., 2015; Elstad et al., 2015; Hosokawa and Sunagawa, 2016; Reyes del Paso et al., 2017; Porta et al., 2018) and since the functioning of all these branches is weakly correlated as it appears from the weak correlation among BRSs (Rudas et al., 1999; O'Leary et al., 2003; Dutoit et al., 2010; Taylor et al., 2015; Marchi et al., 2016), it is not surprising to observe that mean AP does not always obey to the homeostatic principle. The composite nature of the BR is compatible with the observation that short-term fluctuations of HP are not intimately and always linked to those of SAP (Diaz and Taylor, 2006).
The aim of this Research Topic is, on the one hand, to stress the composite nature of the BR and the need of overcome a description solely based on the assessment of the cBR and, on the other hand, the possibility to provide a more complete, and faithful, description of the BR based on the use of a multivariate integrated approach exploiting simultaneous recordings of several physiological variables and state-of-the-art signal processing techniques applied to their spontaneous fluctuations. Among the most relevant challenges that need to be faced to make this approach successful we recall the inherent difficulty posed by the small amplitude of the spontaneous SAP fluctuations in assuring a BR description uncorrupted by confounding mechanisms operating in causal directions incompatible with a BR engagement (Porta et al., 2000, 2013; Diaz and Taylor, 2006).
In this Research Topic the complexity and composite nature of the BR and its assessment is illustrated by the diversity in the contributions. They stress the relevance of the simultaneous assessment of cardiac and sympathetic arms of the BR in healthy subjects (Barbic et al.) and patients (Brunetta et al.), the different characteristics of the BR arms likely to contribute to their weakly correlated behaviors (De Maria et al.), the importance of the clinical information that can be derived from BR markers estimated from spontaneous variability (Bari et al. and Solaro et al.), the chance of elucidating the brainstem nuclei functioning involved in the modulation of the activity of all BR branches (Gerlach et al.), the importance of modeling the dynamical interactions among variables via modeling approaches accounting for directionality (Chalacheva et al.) and feedforward influences (Parati et al.), the possibility given by advanced signal processing tools to provide a more insightful description of the complex behavior of the cBR arm (de Boer and Karemaker) and to limit the effects of confounding factors (Silva et al.), and the opportunity of exploiting smart technologies to broaden the range of applications of BR monitoring (Lázaro et al.). We hope this Research Topic contributes to understanding the complex nature of the BR and its assessment.
Statements
Author contributions
AP and ME conceived the contribution, drafted the manuscript, edited and revised the manuscript, and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
BarbicF.HeusserK.MarchiA.ZamunérA. R.GaugerP.TankJ.et al. (2015). Cardiovascular parameters and neural sympathetic discharge variability before orthostatic syncope: role of sympathetic baroreflex control to the vessels. Physiol. Meas. 36, 633–641. 10.1088/0967-3334/36/4/633
2
BertinieriG.Di RienzoM.CavallazziA.FerrariA. U.PedottiA.ManciaG. (1988). Evaluation of baroreceptor reflex by blood pressure monitoring in unanesthetized cats. Am. J. Physiol. 254, H377–H383. 10.1152/ajpheart.1988.254.2.H377
3
BorgersA. J.van den BornB.-J.AlkemadeA.Eeftinck SchattenkerkD. W.van LieshoutJ. J.WesselingK. H.et al. (2014). Determinants of vascular and cardiac baroreflex sensitivity values in a random population sample. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 52, 65–73. 10.1007/s11517-013-1111-0
4
CasadeiB.MeyerT. E.CoatsA. J.ConwayJ.SleightP. (1992). Baroreflex control of stroke volume in man: an effect mediated by the vagus. J. Physiol. 448, 539–550. 10.1113/jphysiol.1992.sp019056
5
CookeW. H.HoagJ. B.CrossmanA. A.KuuselaT. A.TahvanainenK. U. O.EckbergD. L. (1999). Human responses to upright tilt: a window on central autonomic integration. J. Physiol. 517, 617–628. 10.1111/j.1469-7793.1999.0617t.x
6
De MariaB.BariV.RanucciM.PistuddiV.RanuzziG.TakahashiA. C. M.et al. (2018). Separating arterial pressure increases and decreases in assessing cardiac baroreflex sensitivity via sequence and bivariate phase-rectified signal averaging techniques. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 56, 1241–1252. 10.1007/s11517-017-1765-0
7
DiazT.TaylorJ. A. (2006). Probing the arterial baroreflex: is there a ‘spontaneous' baroreflex? Clin. Auton. Res. 16, 256–261. 10.1007/s10286-006-0352-5
8
DutoitA. P.HartE. C.CharkoudianN.WallinB. G.CurryT. B.JoynerM. J. (2010). Cardiac baroreflex sensitivity is not correlated to sympathetic baroreflex sensitivity within healthy young humans. Hypertension56, 1118–1123. 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.158329
9
ElstadM.WalløeL.HolmeN. L.MaesE.ThoresenM. (2015). Respiratory sinus arrhythmia stabilizes mean arterial blood pressure at high-frequency interval in healthy humans. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 115, 521–530. 10.1007/s00421-014-3042-3
10
FazanR.Jr.de OliveiraM.da SilvaV. J.JoaquimL. F.MontanoN.PortaA.et al. (2005). Frequency-dependent baroreflex modulation of blood pressure and heart rate variability in conscious mice. Am. J. Physiol. 289, H1968–H1975. 10.1152/ajpheart.01224.2004
11
FrankelR. A.MettingP. J.BrittonS. L. (1993). Evaluation of spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity in conscious dogs. J. Physiol. 462, 31–45. 10.1113/jphysiol.1993.sp019541
12
FurlanR.PortaA.CostaF.TankJ.BakerL.SchiaviR.et al. (2000). Oscillatory patterns in sympathetic neural discharge and cardiovascular variables during orthostatic stimulus. Circulation101, 886–892. 10.1161/01.CIR.101.8.886
13
HosokawaK.SunagawaK. (2016). Closed-Loop neuromodulation technology for baroreflex blood pressure control. Proc. IEEE104, 432–443. 10.1109/JPROC.2015.2496290
14
KaremakerJ. M.WesselingK. H. (2008). Variability in cardiovascular control: the baroreflex reconsidered. Cardiovasc. Eng. 8, 23–29. 10.1007/s10558-007-9046-4
15
KienbaumP.KarlssonT.SverrisdottirY. B.ElamM.WallinB. G. (2001). Two sites for modulation of human sympathetic activity by arterial baroreceptors. J. Physiol. 531, 861–869. 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2001.0861h.x
16
La RovereM. T.BiggerJ. T.Jr.MarcusF. I.MortaraA.SchwartzP. J. (1998). Baroreflex sensitivity and heart-rate variability in prediction of total cardiac mortality after myocardial infarction. ATRAMI (Autonomic Tone and Reflexes After Myocardial Infarction) Investigators. Lancet351, 478–484. 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11144-8
17
LaudeD.ElghoziJ. L.GirardA.BellardF.BouhaddiM.CastiglioniP.et al. (2004). Comparison of various techniques used to estimate spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity (the EuroBaVar study). Am. J. Physiol. 286, R226–R231. 10.1152/ajpregu.00709.2002
18
MarchiA.BariV.De MariaB.EslerM.LambertE.BaumertM.et al. (2016). Simultaneous characterization of sympathetic and cardiac arms of the baroreflex through sequence techniques during incremental head-up tilt. Front. Physiol. 7:438. 10.3389/fphys.2016.00438
19
MontanoN.Gnecchi-RusconeT.PortaA.LombardiF.PaganiM.MallianiA. (1994). Power spectrum analysis of heart rate variability to assess changes in sympatho-vagal balance during graded orthostatic tilt. Circulation90, 1826–1831. 10.1161/01.CIR.90.4.1826
20
O'LearyD. D.KimmerlyD. S.CechettoA. D.ShoemakerJ. K. (2003). Differential effect of head-up tilt on cardiovagal and sympathetic baroreflex sensitivity in humans. Exp. Physiol. 88, 769–774. 10.1113/eph8802632
21
ParatiG.di RienzoM.BertinieriG.PomidossiG.CasadeiR.GroppelliA.et al. (1988). Evaluation of the baroreceptor-heart rate reflex by 24-hour intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring in humans. Hypertension12, 214–222. 10.1161/01.HYP.12.2.214
22
PickeringT. G.GribbinB.SleightP. (1972). Comparison of the reflex heart rate response to rising and falling arterial pressure in man. Cardiovasc. Res. 6, 277–283. 10.1093/cvr/6.3.277
23
PortaA.BariV.De MariaB.CairoB.VainiE.MalacarneM.et al. (2018). Peripheral resistance baroreflex during incremental bicycle ergometer exercise: characterization and correlation with cardiac baroreflex. Front. Physiol. 9:688. 10.3389/fphys.2018.00688
24
PortaA.BaselliG.RimoldiO.MallianiA.PaganiM. (2000). Assessing baroreflex gain from spontaneous variability in conscious dogs: role of causality and respiration. Am. J. Physiol. 279, H2558–H2567. 10.1152/ajpheart.2000.279.5.H2558
25
PortaA.CastiglioniP.Di RienzoM.BassaniT.BariV.FaesL.et al. (2013). Cardiovascular control and time domain Granger causality: insights from selective autonomic blockade. Phil. Trans. R Soc. A371:20120161. 10.1098/rsta.2012.0161
26
Reyes del PasoG. A.de la CobaP.Martín-VazquezM.ThayerJ. F. (2017). Time domain measurement of the vascular and myocardial branches of the baroreflex: a study in physically active versus sedentary individuals. Psychophysiology54, 1528–1540. 10.1111/psyp.12898
27
RobertsonD.DiedrichA.ChapleauM. W. (2012). Editorial on arterial baroreflex issue. Auton. Neurosci. -Basic Clin. 172, 1–3. 10.1016/j.autneu.2012.10.010
28
RudasL.CrossmanA. A.MorilloC. A.HalliwillJ. R.TahvanainenK. U. O.KuuselaT. A.et al. (1999). Human sympathetic and vagal baroreflex responses to sequential nitroprusside and phenylephrine. Am. J. Physiol. 276, H1691–H1698. 10.1152/ajpheart.1999.276.5.H1691
29
SmithM. L.EllenbogenK. A.EckbergD. L.SzentpeteryS.ThamesM. D. (1989). Subnormal heart period variability in heart failure: effect of cardiac transplantation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 14, 106–111. 10.1016/0735-1097(89)90059-4
30
SmythH. S.SleightP.PickeringG. W. (1969). Reflex regulation of arterial pressure during sleep in man. A quantitative method of assessing baroreflex sensitivity. Circ. Res. 24 ,109–121. 10.1161/01.RES.24.1.109
31
SundlofG.WallinB. G. (1978). Human muscle nerve sympathetic activity at rest. Relationship to blood pressure and age. J. Physiol. 274, 621–637. 10.1113/jphysiol.1978.sp012170
32
TaylorC. E.WitterT.El SayedK.HissenS. L.JohnsonA. W.MacefieldV. G. (2015). Relationship between spontaneous sympathetic baroreflex sensitivity and cardiac baroreflex sensitivity in healthy young individuals. Physiol. Rep. 3:e12536. 10.14814/phy2.12536
33
VaschilloE. G.VaschilloB.BuckmanJ. F.PandinaR. J.BatesM. E. (2012). Measurement of vascular tone and stroke volume baroreflex gain. Psychophysiology49, 193–197. 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01305.x
34
YasumasuT.AbeH.OginosawaY.TakaharaK.NakashimaY. (2005). Assessment of cardiac baroreflex function during fixed atrioventricular pacing using baroreceptor-stroke volume reflex sensitivity. J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. 16, 727–731. 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2005.40767.x
Summary
Keywords
heart rate variability, arterial blood pressure, sympathetic neural activity, cardiovascular control, peripheral resistances, autonomic nervous system, baroreflex sensitivity
Citation
Porta A and Elstad M (2020) Editorial: Probing the Cardiac Arm of the Baroreflex and Complementary Branches. Front. Neurosci. 13:1422. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2019.01422
Received
05 December 2019
Accepted
16 December 2019
Published
10 January 2020
Volume
13 - 2019
Edited and reviewed by
Vaughan G. Macefield, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Australia
Updates
Copyright
© 2020 Porta and Elstad.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Alberto Porta alberto.porta@unimi.it
This article was submitted to Autonomic Neuroscience, a section of the journal Frontiers in Neuroscience
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.