Cardiorespiratory Response and Power Output During Submaximal Exercise in Normobaric Versus Hypobaric Hypoxia: A Pilot Study Using a Specific Chamber that Controls Environmental Factors.

Abstract

Takezawa, Toshihiro, Shohei Dobashi, and Katsuhiro Koyama. Cardiorespiratory response and power output during submaximal exercise in normobaric versus hypobaric hypoxia: a pilot study using a specific chamber that controls environmental factors. High Alt Med Biol. 22: 201-208, 2021. Background: Many previous studies have examined hypoxia-induced physiological responses using various conditions, e.g., artificially reduced atmospheric oxygen concentration [normobaric hypoxia (NH) condition] or low barometric pressure at a mountain [hypobaric hypoxia (HH) condition]. However, when comparing the results from these previous studies conducted in artificial NH and HH including real high altitude, we must consider the possibility that environmental factors, such as temperature, humidity, and fraction of inspired carbon dioxide, might affect the physiological responses. Therefore, we examined cardiorespiratory responses and exercise performances during low- to high-intensity exercise at a fixed heart rate (HR) in both NH and HH using a specific chamber where atmospheric oxygen concentration and barometric pressure as well as the abovementioned environmental factors were precisely controlled. Methods: Ten well-trained university students (eight males and two females) performed the exercise test consisting of two 20-minute submaximal pedaling at the intensity corresponding to 50% (low) and 70% (high) of their HR reserve, under three conditions [NH (fraction of inspired oxygen, 0.135; barometric pressure, 754 mmHg), HH (fraction of inspired oxygen, 0.209; barometric pressure, 504 mmHg), and normobaric normoxia (NN; fraction of inspired oxygen, 0.209; barometric pressure, 754 mmHg)]. Peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) to estimate arterial oxygen saturation and partial pressure of end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO2) were monitored throughout the experiment. Results: SpO2, PETCO2, and power output at fixed HRs (i.e., pedaling efficiency) in NH and HH were all significantly lower than those in NN. Moreover, high-intensity exercise in HH induced greater decreases in SpO2 and power output than did high-intensity exercise in NH (NH vs. HH; SpO2, 78.2% ± 5.0% vs. 75.1% ± 7.1%; power output, 120.7 ± 24.9 W vs. 112.4 ± 23.2 W, both p < 0.05). However, high-intensity exercise in HH induced greater increases in PETCO2 than did high-intensity exercise in NH (NH vs. HH; 54.2 ± 5.9 mmHg vs. 57.2 ± 3.4 mmHg, p < 0.01). Conclusions: These results suggest that physiological responses and power output at a fixed HR during hypoxic exposure might depend on the method used to generate the hypoxic condition.