Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 875

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of Static and Dynamic Cerebral Autoregulation Measurements

Tiecks, Frank P., Lam, Arthur M., Aaslid, Rune, Newell, David W.·1995·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose Cerebral autoregulation can be evaluated by measuring relative blood flow changes in response to a steady-state change in the blood pressure (static method) or during the response to a rapid change in blood pressure (dynamic method). The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the two methods in humans with both intact and impaired autoregulatory capacity. Methods Using intraoperative transcranial Doppler sonography recordings from both middle cerebral arteries, we determined static and dynamic autoregulatory responses in 10 normal subjects undergoing elective surgical procedures. The changes in cerebrovascular resistance were estimated from the changes in cerebral blood flow velocity and arterial blood pressure in response to manipulations of blood pressure. Static autoregulation was determined by analyzing the response to a phenylephrine-induced rise in blood pressure, whereas rapid deflation of a blood pressure cuff around one thigh served as a stimulus for testing dynamic autoregulation. Both measurements were performed in patients with intact autoregulation during propofol anesthesia and again in the same patients after autoregulation had been impaired by administration of high-dose isoflurane. Results There was a significant reduction in autoregulatory capacity after the administration of high-dose isoflurane, which could be demonstrated using static ( P <.0001) and dynamic ( P <.0001) methods. The correlation between static or steady-state and dynamic autoregulation measurements was highly significant ( r =.93, P <.0001). Conclusions These data show that in normal human subjects measurement of dynamic autoregulation yields similar results as static testing of intact and pharmacologically impaired autoregulation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.str.26.6.1014

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 875

Metadata

Authors
Tiecks, F. P., Lam, A. M., Aaslid, R., & Newell, D. W.
Venue
Stroke
Published
1995-06
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
1014-1019
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2100436846
Cited by
875
References
0
FWCI
8.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Static and Dynamic Cerebral Autoregulation Measurements. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.26.6.1014
The paper
Tiecks, F. P., Lam, A. M., Aaslid, R., & Newell, D. W. (1995). Comparison of Static and Dynamic Cerebral Autoregulation Measurements. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.26.6.1014

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.