Reproducibility of dynamic cerebral autoregulation breathing resulting in lower CBFV. From our results no benefits arise in favour of paced breathing versus spontaneous breathing. In this study no impact of the different signal processing approaches on dCA parameters was found. It is shown that gain and phase are very robust under the different analysis methods evaluated and there is no need for prescribing a specific one of these signal-processing regimes. The threshold for significant coherence is not a fixed value, but depends on the degrees of freedom of each approach. Based on reproducibility results no preference can be made for morn- ing versus afternoon measurements or for spontaneous versus paced breathing. Poor reproducibility of dCA parameters remains a major issue hampering the clinical applicability in individual patients. Future research should be directed towards less variable dCA parameters. RAP could be a promising parameter to further explore in developing methods for estimating dCA. In conclusion, quantification of dCA does not favour TFA versus MMPF in terms of reproducibility, which is poor for both gain and phase. Neither does it favour as a stimulus spontaneous versus paced breathing and morning versus afternoon day-time recording. Acknowledgements The authors thank Prof. R.B. Panerai (University of Leicester, UK) for his valu- able contributions to the manuscript. 37
proefschrift gommer inhoud met kaft.indd
To see the actual publication please follow the link above