AIMS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the repeatability of forearm skin blood flow responses to intradermal injections of acetylcholine (ACh) and endothelin-1 (ET-1) using a double injection technique (DIT) and a laser Doppler imager (LDI) scanner in the human skin microcirculation. METHODS: We used a laser Doppler imager (Moor LDI V3.01) to continuously monitor the change in skin blood flow during intradermal administration of physiological saline (0.9% NaCl), acetylcholine (ACh 10(-7), 10(-8), 10(-9) M) and endothelin-1 (ET-1 10(-14), 10(-16), 10(-18) M) in 10 healthy male subjects. Subjects were examined on 3 different days for assessment of interday and interobserver repeatability. Injections of either drug were randomly placed on different sites of the forearm. Laser Doppler images were collected before and after injection at 2.5 min intervals for 30 min. Data were analysed after the completion of each experiment using Moor Software V.3.01. Results are expressed as changes from baseline in arbitrary perfusion units (PU). RESULTS: ACh caused a significant vasodilation (P < 0.0001 anova, mean +/- SE: 766 +/- 152 PU, ACh 10(-9) M; 1868 +/- 360 PU, ACh 10(-8) M; 4188 +/- 848 PU, ACh 10(-7) M; mean of days 1 and 2, n = 10), and ET-1 induced a significant vasoconstrictive response (P < 0.0001 anova, -421 +/- 83 PU, ET-1 10(-18) M; -553 +/- 66 PU, ET-1 10(-16) M; -936 +/- 90 PU, ET-1 10(-14) M; mean of days 1 and 2, n = 10). There was no difference on the response to either drug on repeated days. Bland-Altman analyses showed a close agreement of responses between days with repeatability coefficients of 1625.4 PU for ACh, and 386.0 PU for ET-1 (95% CI: ACh, -1438 to 1747 PU, ET-1, -399 to 358 PU) and between observers with repeatability coefficients of 1057.2 PU for ACh and 255.8 PU for ET-1 (95% CI: ACh, -1024 to 1048 PU, ET-1, -252 to 249 PU). The variability between these responses was independent of average flux values for both ACh and ET-1. There was a significant correlation between responses measured in the same site, in the same individual on two different days by the same observer (ACh, r = 0.94, P < 0.0001; ET-1, r = 0.90, P < 0.0006), and between responses measured by two different observers (ACh, r = 0.94, P < 0.0001; ET-1, r = 0.91, P < 0.0003). CONCLUSION: We have shown that interday and intraobserver responses to intradermal injections of ET-1 and ACh, assessed using the DIT in combination with an LDI scanner, exhibited good reproducibility and may be a useful tool for studying the skin microcirculation in vivo.
AIMS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the repeatability of forearm skin blood flow responses to intradermal injections of acetylcholine (ACh) and endothelin-1 (ET-1) using a double injection technique (DIT) and a laser Doppler imager (LDI) scanner in the human skin microcirculation. METHODS: We used a laser Doppler imager (Moor LDI V3.01) to continuously monitor the change in skin blood flow during intradermal administration of physiological saline (0.9% NaCl), acetylcholine (ACh 10(-7), 10(-8), 10(-9) M) and endothelin-1 (ET-1 10(-14), 10(-16), 10(-18) M) in 10 healthy male subjects. Subjects were examined on 3 different days for assessment of interday and interobserver repeatability. Injections of either drug were randomly placed on different sites of the forearm. Laser Doppler images were collected before and after injection at 2.5 min intervals for 30 min. Data were analysed after the completion of each experiment using Moor Software V.3.01. Results are expressed as changes from baseline in arbitrary perfusion units (PU). RESULTS:ACh caused a significant vasodilation (P < 0.0001 anova, mean +/- SE: 766 +/- 152 PU, ACh 10(-9) M; 1868 +/- 360 PU, ACh 10(-8) M; 4188 +/- 848 PU, ACh 10(-7) M; mean of days 1 and 2, n = 10), and ET-1 induced a significant vasoconstrictive response (P < 0.0001 anova, -421 +/- 83 PU, ET-1 10(-18) M; -553 +/- 66 PU, ET-1 10(-16) M; -936 +/- 90 PU, ET-1 10(-14) M; mean of days 1 and 2, n = 10). There was no difference on the response to either drug on repeated days. Bland-Altman analyses showed a close agreement of responses between days with repeatability coefficients of 1625.4 PU for ACh, and 386.0 PU for ET-1 (95% CI: ACh, -1438 to 1747 PU, ET-1, -399 to 358 PU) and between observers with repeatability coefficients of 1057.2 PU for ACh and 255.8 PU for ET-1 (95% CI: ACh, -1024 to 1048 PU, ET-1, -252 to 249 PU). The variability between these responses was independent of average flux values for both ACh and ET-1. There was a significant correlation between responses measured in the same site, in the same individual on two different days by the same observer (ACh, r = 0.94, P < 0.0001; ET-1, r = 0.90, P < 0.0006), and between responses measured by two different observers (ACh, r = 0.94, P < 0.0001; ET-1, r = 0.91, P < 0.0003). CONCLUSION: We have shown that interday and intraobserver responses to intradermal injections of ET-1 and ACh, assessed using the DIT in combination with an LDI scanner, exhibited good reproducibility and may be a useful tool for studying the skin microcirculation in vivo.
Authors: Amy S Shah; Zhiqian Gao; Lawrence M Dolan; Dana Dabelea; Ralph B D'Agostino; Elaine M Urbina Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2014-08-01 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: Madhur P Motwani; Julia D Flint; Roel Ph De Maeyer; James N Fullerton; Andrew M Smith; Daniel Jb Marks; Derek W Gilroy Journal: J Pathol Clin Res Date: 2016-05-04
Authors: Alexei A Kamshilin; Maxim A Volynsky; Olga Khayrutdinova; Dilyara Nurkhametova; Laura Babayan; Alexander V Amelin; Oleg V Mamontov; Rashid Giniatullin Journal: J Headache Pain Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 7.277
Authors: Hafid Ait-Oufella; Simon Bourcier; Mikael Alves; Arnaud Galbois; Jean-Luc Baudel; Dimitri Margetis; Naike Bige; Georges Offenstadt; Eric Maury; Bertrand Guidet Journal: Ann Intensive Care Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 6.925