Desensitization of thermal hyperemia in the skin is reproducible.

OBJECTIVE: Local heating increases skin blood flow SkBF (thermal hyperemia). In a previous study, we reported that a first local thermal stimulus could attenuate the hyperemic response to a second one applied later on the same skin spot, a phenomenon that we termed desensitization. However, other studies found no evidence for desensitization in similar conditions. The aim of the present work was to test whether it was related to differences in instrumentation. METHODS: Twenty-eight healthy young males were studied. Two pairs of heating chambers, one custom-made (our study) and one commercial (other groups), were affixed to forearm skin. SkBF was measured with single-point laser-Doppler flowmetry (LDF) (780nm) in one pair, and laser-Doppler imaging (LDI) (633nm) in the other. A temperature step from 34 to 41°C, was applied for 30minutes and repeated after two hours. RESULTS: During the second thermal challenge, the plateau SkBF was lower than during the first thermal and was observed with each of the four combinations of SkBF measurement techniques and heating equipment (p<0.05 for all conditions, range -9% to -16% of the initial value). CONCLUSION: Desensitization of thermal hyperemia is not specific to peculiar operating conditions.

Quantification of aortic flow by phase-contrast magnetic resonance in patients with bicuspid aortic valve.

AIMS: Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) causes complex flow patterns in the ascending aorta (AAo), which may compromise the accuracy of flow measurement by phase-contrast magnetic resonance (PC-MR). Therefore, we aimed to assess and compare the accuracy of forward flow measurement in the AAo, where complex flow is more dominant in BAV patients, with flow quantification in the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) and the aortic valve orifice (AV), where complex flow is less important, in BAV patients and controls. METHODS AND RESULTS: Flow was measured by PC-MR in 22 BAV patients and 20 controls at the following positions: (i) LVOT, (ii) AV, and (iii) AAo, and compared with the left ventricular stroke volume (LVSV). The correlation between the LVSV and the forward flow in the LVOT, the AV, and the AAo was good in BAV patients (r = 0.97/0.96/0.93; P < 0.01) and controls (r = 0.96/0.93/0.93; P < 0.01). However, in relation with the LVSV, the forward flow in the AAo was mildly underestimated in controls and much more in BAV patients [median (inter-quartile range): 9% (4%/15%) vs. 22% (8%/30%); P < 0.01]. This was not the case in the LVOT and the AV. The severity of flow underestimation in the AAo was associated with flow eccentricity. CONCLUSION: Flow measurement in the AAo leads to an underestimation of the forward flow in BAV patients. Measurement in the LVOT or the AV, where complex flow is less prominent, is an alternative means for quantifying the systolic forward flow in BAV patients.