From spaceflight to blood doping: Devices for assessing haemoglobin mass and intravascular volumes

Comparison of the automatised and the optimised carbon monoxide rebreathing methods

Recently, a new automated carbon monoxide (CO) rebreathing method (aCO) to estimate haemoglobin mass (Hb_mass) was introduced. The aCO method uses the same CO dilution principle as the widely used optimised CO rebreathing method (oCO). The two methods differ in terms of CO administration, body position, and rebreathing time. Whereas with aCO, CO is administered automatically by the system in a supine position of the subject, with oCO, CO is administered manually by an experienced operator with the subject sitting. Therefore, the aim of this study was to quantify possible differences in Hb_mass estimated with the two methods. Hb_mass was estimated in 18 subjects (9 females, 9 males) with oCO using capillary blood samples (oCOc) and aCO taking simultaneously venous blood samples (aCOv) and capillary blood samples (aCOc). Overall, Hb_mass was different between the three measurement procedures (F = 57.55, p < .001). Hb_mass was lower (p < .001) for oCOc (737 g ± 179 g) than for both aCOv (825 g ± 189 g, -9.3%) and aCOc (835 g ± 189 g, -10.6%). There was no difference in Hb_mass estimated with aCOv and aCOc procedures (p = .12). Three factors can likely explain the 10% difference in Hb_mass: differences in calculations (including a factor for myoglobin flux), body position (distribution of CO in blood circulation) during rebreathing, and time of blood sampling. Moreover, the determination of Hb_mass with aCO is possible with capillary blood sampling instead of venous blood sampling.

Baroreflex responses during dry resting and exercise apnoeas in air and pure oxygen

Purpose

We analysed the characteristics of arterial baroreflexes during the first phase of apnoea (φ1).

Methods

12 divers performed rest and exercise (30 W) apnoeas (air and oxygen). We measured beat-by-beat R-to-R interval (RRi) and mean arterial pressure (MAP). Mean RRi and MAP values defined the operating point (OP) before (PRE-ss) and in the second phase (φ2) of apnoea. Baroreflex sensitivity (BRS, ms·mmHg⁻¹) was calculated with the sequence method.

Results

In PRE-ss, BRS was (median [IQR]): at rest, 20.3 [10.0–28.6] in air and 18.8 [13.8–25.2] in O₂; at exercise 9.2[8.4–13.2] in air and 10.1[8.4–13.6] in O₂. In φ1, during MAP decrease, BRS was lower than in PRE-ss at rest (6.6 [5.3–11.4] in air and 7.7 [4.9–14.3] in O₂, p < 0.05). At exercise, BRS in φ1 was 6.4 [3.9–13.1] in air and 6.7 [4.1–9.5] in O₂. After attainment of minimum MAP (MAPmin), baroreflex resetting started. After attainment of minimum RRi, baroreflex sequences reappeared. In φ2, BRS at rest was 12.1 [9.6–16.2] in air, 12.9 [9.2–15.8] in O₂. At exercise (no φ2 in air), it was 7.9 [5.4–10.7] in O₂. In φ2, OP acts at higher MAP values.

Conclusion

In apnoea φ1, there is a sudden correction of MAP fall via baroreflex. The lower BRS in the earliest φ1 suggests a possible parasympathetic mechanism underpinning this reduction. After MAPmin, baroreflex resets, displacing its OP at higher MAP level; thus, resetting may not be due to central command. After resetting, restoration of BRS suggests re-establishment of vagal drive.

Reproducibility of the CO rebreathing technique with a lower CO dose and a shorter rebreathing duration at sea level and at 2320 m of altitude

Total hemoglobin mass (Hb_mass) is routinely assessed in studies by the carbon monoxide (CO) rebreathing. Its clinical application is often hindered due to the consequent rise in carboxyhemoglobin (%HbCO) and the concern of CO toxicity. We tested the reproducibility of the CO rebreathing with a CO dose of 0.5 mL/kg body mass (CO_0.5) compared to 1.5 mL/kg (CO_1.5) and when shortening the CO rebreathing protocol. Therefore, CO rebreathing was performed 1×/day in eight healthy individuals on four consecutive days. On each day, either CO_0.5 (CO_0.5-1 and CO_0.5-2) or CO_1.5 (CO_1.5-1 and CO_1.5-2) was administered. Venous blood samples to determine %HbCO and quantify Hb_mass were obtained prior to, and at 6 (T₆), 8 (T₈) and 10 min (T₁₀) of CO rebreathing. This protocol was tested at sea level and at 2320 m to investigate the altitude-related measurement error. At sea level, the mean difference (95% limits of agreement) in Hb_mass between CO_0.5-1 and CO_0.5-2 was 26 g (-26; 79 g) and between CO_1.5-1 and CO_1.5-2, it was 17 g (-18; 52 g)_. The respective typical error (TE) corresponded to 2.4% (CO_0.5) and 1.5% (CO_1.5), while it was 6.5% and 3.0% at 2320 m. With CO_0.5, shortening the CO rebreathing resulted in a TE for Hb_mass of 4.4% (T₈ vs. T₁₀) and 14.1% (T₆ vs T₁₀) and with CO_1.5, TE was 1.6% and 5.8%. In conclusion, the CO dose and rebreathing time for the CO rebreathing procedure can be decreased at the cost of a measurement error ranging from 1.5-14.1%.