Comparison of signal-averaging and regression approaches to analyzing sympathetic transduction.

purposeSpontaneous sympathetic transduction reflects the vascular and/or pressor responses to bursts of muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA). Separately, signal-averaging and regression-based approaches have been implemented to quantify resting sympathetic transduction. It is unknown whether the outcomes of these analytical approaches provide (dis)similar information, which is imperative for between-study comparisons and the amalgamation of results for synthesis of multiple studies (i.e., meta-analyses). We explored the diastolic blood pressure (DBP) responses to spontaneous bursts of MSNA between these two methods of analysis.

methodsResting beat-by-beat DBP (via finger photoplethysmography) and common peroneal nerve MSNA (via microneurography) were recorded in 52 healthy, normotensive adults (age 38 ± 20 years; 19 females). For the signal-averaged method, transduction was quantified as the mean peak increase in DBP (ΔDBP) during the 12 cardiac cycles following each MSNA burst. In addition, DBP was regressed to a moving two-cardiac-cycle window of normalized relative burst height (mmHg/relative %) to provide the regression-based transduction outcome.

resultsThe signal-averaged (1.2 ± 0.7 mmHg) and regression-based approaches (0.009 ± 0.016 mmHg/%) were unrelated (ρ = 0.03, p = 0.86). Adding to the discrepancy, only the signal-averaging approach demonstrated a lower transduction in middle-aged-older males versus younger males.

conclusionsThe decision of which method to use when calculating sympathetic transduction influences study outcomes, with the two most common methods of determining transduction being unrelated. There are challenges of making sweeping conclusions across studies if different analysis strategies are implemented. An understanding of when to use each method is needed to adopt a harmonized approach to quantifying sympathetic transduction.