Baker, Sarah

Introduction: Menopausal hot flashes are defined as rapid, intense sweating and/or an intense feeling of warmth. Subjective recordings of menopausal hot flashes can be difficult to obtain due to inconvenience to the individual and poor recall. This calls for an improved method to quantify hot flashes that are less dependent on human interaction. The goal of this study was to determine if an ambulatory skin conductance hot flash monitor would detect menopausal hot flash occurrence and frequency to the same degree as those reported by study participants. Methods: Thirty-five peri- and postmenopausal females (age: 53±4 years) participated in this study. An ambulatory, noninvasive sternal skin conductance monitor was placed on each participant for a 24-hour recording period. The monitor recorded a hot flash when an increase of 0.2 micromhos was detected in the participant’s sweat level compared to their baseline (objective). Participants manually recorded perceived hot flash occurrence on the monitor (subjective). For analysis, a monitor recording with ≥20 consecutive hours of intact data was included. Hot flash frequency was defined as the number of hot flashes per recording period. A Mann-Whitney test was conducted to compare subjective and objective hot flash frequencies. Statistical analyses for agreement in hot flash occurrence (yes/no; Cohen’s Kappa) and frequency (Bland-Altman) were completed. Data are reported as mean±SD or median (IQR). Results: The average hot flash monitor recording consisted of 23.8±0.7 hours of data. Twenty-eight females reported at least one hot flash during their recording period (5 [3-9] subjective hot flashes) while 7 females did not report any hot flashes. The monitor detected at least one hot flash in 30 females (10 [5-21] objective hot flashes) and no hot flashes in 5 females. For 3 participants, both the subjective and objective reports showed zero hot flashes. There was a significant difference between the frequency of hot flashes reported by all participants (3 [1-8] subjective hot flashes) and those detected by the hot flash monitor (8 [4-19] objective hot flashes; p=0.006). There was no agreement between the subjective (self-report) and objective (monitor) assessments of hot flash occurrence (k= -0.1734). The Bland-Altman showed a mean bias of 7.1±8.6 towards objective hot flash frequency with limits of agreement of -9.8 to 23.9. Conclusion: The ambulatory sternal skin conductance monitor used in the current study showed no agreement in detecting menopausal hot flashes compared to self-reported hot flashes. Overall, the monitor substantially overestimated the frequency of menopausal hot flashes that participants reported. While further investigation might be needed to improve the monitor’s sensitivity for accurate hot flash detection, it is possible that the monitor may be detecting subclinical menopausal hot flashes that are less recognizable to the individual. This abstract was presented at the American Physiology Summit 2026 and is only available in HTML format. There is no downloadable file or PDF version. The Physiology editorial board was not involved in the peer review process.

Background: Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a common type of myocardial infarction in females under the age of 50 years, caused by sudden separation between the coronary arterial wall layers and/or hematoma. The SCAD patient population is mostly females (~80%) with few or no traditional cardiovascular disease risk factors (e.g., obesity, hypertension). Common triggers for SCAD include sympathoexcitatory stimuli, such as intense physical and emotional stress. This implicates the sympathetic nervous system in the pathophysiology of SCAD. Thus, we aimed to investigate sympathetic nervous system responses to mental stress in patients with a history of SCAD. We hypothesized that females with a history of SCAD exhibit a greater increase in muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) with acute exposure to mental stress compared to healthy females. Methods: Seven females with a history of SCAD (age: 48±9 yrs, BMI: 29±6 kg/m 2 ) and seven age- and BMI-matched healthy female controls (CON, age: 49±9 yrs, BMI: 26±6 kg/m 2 ) participated in the study (both p>0.05). MSNA was measured via peroneal microneurography during a 2-minute rest, a 5-minute Stroop Color Word Test aimed at inducing mental stress, and a 2-minute recovery. Heart rate (HR, 3-lead electrocardiography) and BP (finger photoplethysmography) were continuously recorded during each stage. Data are presented as an absolute change from rest (Δmean±SD). Two-way independent t-tests were used for statistical analyses. Results: Resting mean blood pressure (MBP, SCAD: 96±14 vs CON: 89±7 mmHg, p=0.27), heart rate (HR, SCAD: 56±11vs CON: 65±16 bpm, p=0.25), MSNA burst frequency (SCAD: 22±9 vs CON: 18±7 bursts/minute, p=0.40) and total MSNA (SCAD: 1135±471 vs CON: 951±245 au/min, p=0.41) were not different between the groups. During the Stroop Color Word Test, average changes in MBP (SCAD: Δ10±9 vs CON: Δ8±5 mmHg, p=0.67) and HR (SCAD: Δ11±7 vs CON: Δ14±5 bpm, p=0.35) were not different between the groups. Similarly, average changes in MBP (SCAD: Δ3±4 vs CON: Δ-2±5 mmHg, p=0.13) and HR (SCAD: Δ3±4 vs CON: Δ3±2 bpm, p=0.62) were not different during the recovery. Changes in MSNA burst frequency with the Stroop Color Word Test (SCAD: Δ1±7 vs CON: Δ6±7 bursts/minute, p=0.22) and recovery (SCAD: Δ0±5 vs CON: Δ4±4 bursts/minute, p=0.13) were not different between the groups. Total MSNA changes were also not different during the Stroop Color Word Test (SCAD: Δ267±335 vs CON: Δ606±432 au/min, p=0.15) and recovery (SCAD: Δ68±666 vs CON: Δ217±217 au/min, p=0.61) between the two groups. Conclusion: These preliminary data suggest that contrary to our hypothesis, sympathetic nervous system responses to acute mental stress exposure are not different between females with a history of SCAD and healthy females. Further investigation is needed to understand MSNA association with chronic stress exposure in females with a history of SCAD. Funding: NIH K23 HL155506 This abstract was presented at the American Physiology Summit 2026 and is only available in HTML format. There is no downloadable file or PDF version. The Physiology editorial board was not involved in the peer review process.

Our knowledge regarding baroreflex regulation of subpopulations of differently sized sympathetic action potentials (APs) remains incomplete. This study tested the hypothesis that baroreflex sigmoid morphology varies across AP subpopulations. In 12 healthy individuals (6 females; 32 ± 5 years), we measured diastolic blood pressure (DBP; brachial artery catheter) and muscle sympathetic APs (peroneal microneurography; continuous wavelet transform) during a modified Oxford protocol (100 μg nitroprusside bolus, 150 μg phenylephrine bolus). Baroreflex sigmoids (four-parameter logistic functions) modelled the relationship between DBP and sympathetic AP discharge probability for 10 normalized AP clusters. For each AP cluster, baroreflex sigmoid morphology was quantified by max gain, threshold, centering, and saturation pressures, and operating and response ranges. One-way analyses of variance and Dunnett post-hoc tests were performed. Data are mean ± SD. At the centering pressure of the baroreflex sigmoid, max gain was greater for medium APs (e.g., Cluster 3: -5.6 ± 2.9%/mmHg) compared to small (e.g., Cluster 1: -1.4 ± 1.1%/mmHg; P < 0.01) and large APs (e.g., Cluster 9: -0.6 ± 0.4%/mmHg; P < 0.01). Discharge probability at the centering pressure was also greater for medium APs (e.g., Cluster 3: 61 ± 22%) compared to small (e.g., Cluster 1: 12 ± 10%; P < 0.01) and large APs (e.g., Cluster 9: 3 ± 3%; P < 0.01). There were no differences in the saturation pressure (i.e., DBP where any further reduction does not elicit an increase in AP discharge probability) between AP clusters (main effect P = 0.22). The threshold pressure (i.e., DBP where any further reductions elicit an increase in AP discharge probability) was greater for medium (e.g., Cluster 3: 78 ± 8mmHg) compared to large APs (e.g., Cluster 9: 74 ± 11mmHg; P = 0.03). The operating range (i.e., Threshold – Saturation DBP) was greater for medium (e.g., Cluster 3: 14 ± 3mmHg) compared to large APs (e.g., Cluster 9: 8 ± 5mmHg; P < 0.01). There were no differences in the threshold pressure or operating range of medium compared to small APs (both P ≥ 0.82). The response range (i.e., Saturation – Threshold discharge probability) was greater for medium (e.g., Cluster 3: 26 ± 13%) compared to small (e.g., Cluster 1: 5 ± 4%; P < 0.01) and large APs (e.g., Cluster 9: 1 ± 1%; P < 0.01). These data confirm prior work using linear modeling and spontaneous approaches to quantify sympathetic AP baroreflex gain and extend to demonstrate variation in the morphology of the baroreflex sigmoid. During large changes in blood pressures, we identify differences in broader features of baroreflex control (e.g., threshold pressure, operating range, and response range) between AP subpopulations that support strong baroreflex regulation over medium-sized APs. This abstract was presented at the American Physiology Summit 2026 and is only available in HTML format. There is no downloadable file or PDF version. The Physiology editorial board was not involved in the peer review process.