Sex Differences in Sympathetic Neural-Hemodynamic Balance: Implications for Human Blood Pressure Regulation
Open accessAbstract
Among young normotensive men, a reciprocal balance between cardiac output and sympathetic nerve activity is important in the regulation of arterial pressure. In young women, the balance among cardiac output, peripheral resistance, and sympathetic nerve activity is unknown. Consequently, the aim of this study was to examine the relationship of cardiac output and total peripheral resistance to muscle sympathetic nerve activity in young women. Multiunit peroneal recordings of muscle sympathetic nerve activity were obtained in 17 women (mean±SEM: age 24±3 years) and 21 men (mean±SEM: age 25±5 years). Mean resting muscle sympathetic nerve activity was lower in women compared with men (19±3 versus 25±1 bursts minute −1 ; P <0.05), as was mean arterial pressure (89±1 versus 94±2 mm Hg; P <0.05). Mean arterial pressure was not related to muscle sympathetic nerve activity in men ( P =0.80) or women ( P =0.62). There was a positive relationship between total peripheral resistance and muscle sympathetic nerve activity ( r =0.62; P <0.05) and an inverse relationship between cardiac output and muscle sympathetic nerve activity ( r =−0.69; P <0.05) in men. Unexpectedly, muscle sympathetic nerve activity had no relationship to either total peripheral resistance ( r =−0.27; P >0.05) or cardiac output ( r =0.23; P >0.05) in women. Our results demonstrate that men and women rely on different integrated physiological mechanisms to maintain a normal arterial pressure despite widely varying sympathetic nerve activity among individuals. These findings may have important implications for understanding how hypertension and other disorders of blood pressure regulation occur in men and women.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Endogenous female sex hormones influence blood pressure regulation, and their absence may modulate hypertension risk.
“These findings suggest that endogenous female sex hormones (estrogen and progesterone) influence blood pressure regulation and their absence may modulate hypertension risk.”
From Oral contraceptive use, muscle sympathetic nerve activity, and systemic hemodynamics in young women (2015) · cites this paper as [15]
The Conclusions and Perspectives suggest that female reproductive hormones affect blood-pressure regulation and that loss of estrogen-related effects may increase hypertension risk in postmenopausal women with high MSNA. The Discussion’s Limitations section says estrogen and progesterone were not measured; the proposed vascular mechanism concerns estrogen, so the paper does not specifically support an effect of progesterone. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn young men and older postmenopausal women, there is a positive correlation between muscle sympathetic nerve activity and mean arterial pressure, as well as between muscle sympathetic nerve activity and total peripheral resistance.
“Conversely, in young men and older postmenopausal women, there is a positive correlation between MSNA and MAP, as well as MSNA and TPR.15”
From Oral contraceptive use, muscle sympathetic nerve activity, and systemic hemodynamics in young women (2015) · cites this paper as [15]
The Results report a positive MSNA–TPR correlation in young men but no MSNA–MAP correlation in men. The Perspectives say the MSNA–MAP relationship becomes positive with age, more so in women, but the paper does not establish a positive MSNA–TPR correlation in older postmenopausal women. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 349
- Authors
- Hart, E. C., Charkoudian, N., Wallin, B. G., Curry, T. B., Eisenach, J. H., & Joyner, M. J.
- Affiliations
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Venue
- Hypertension
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 571-576
- ISSN
- 0194-911X (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4563
- PMC
- PMC3733790
- OpenAlex
- W2091333777
- Semantic Scholar
- 94f92d2995fb8b4dc759f5920b27752e4ffd8911
- Cited by
- 349
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 12.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Hypertension (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL 083947, R01HL083947)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Keywords
- sex differences, muscle sympathetic nerve activity, cardiac output, systemic vascular resistance, blood pressure regulation, young women
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Blood Pressure, Cardiac Output, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Muscle, Smooth, Vascular, Norepinephrine, Sex Characteristics, Sympathetic Nervous System, Vascular Resistance
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