Blood Rheology Aspects of the Microcirculation

To elucidate the basis for the drop in pressure from large artery to vein, Jean Léonard Marie Poiseuille (1797-1869) undertook a series of seminal studies that defined the laws of fluid flow in tubes of uniform cross-section and that identified the microcirculation as the major site of the resistance to flow [1, 2]. While best known for his meticulous experimental studies of viscous flow in glass tubes [2], he also made numerous observations in the mesentery of the frog and other microvascular preparations; these observations served to highlight the dynamics of red cell distribution, the presence of the annular plasma layer and the “skimming” of plasma by capillaries, and the adhesion of white cells to the endothelium of post-capillary venules [3]. Yet it wasn’t until almost a century later that physiologists began to methodically explore the resistance to flow within the microcirculation proper using techniques of intravital microscopy. Landis [4] pioneered many quantitative methods for describing microvascular structure and function. Using finely drawn pipettes inserted into microvessels of frog mesentery, and calculating the velocity of bolus infusions of dyes through successive microvascular divisions, Landis attempted to calculate the resistance to flow within the capillary network and concluded that Poiseulle’s law cannot be applied to the flow of blood through the capillary network except in a very limited sense. However, with the advent of sophisticated instruments for measurement of capillary pressure [5, 6] and red blood cell velocity [7], relatively precise quantitative measurements of pressure drops [8] and flow rates [9, 10] could be obtained; such measurements thus provided direct in situ flow resistance data for the hierarchy of microvessels from arteriole to venule [11]. As shown in Figure 1, measurements of pressure drops and flows in single unbranched microvessels [11] reveal that over the broad range of diameters (D) within the microcirculation proper, Poiseuille’s fourth power relationship (i.e., resistance varies inversely with D) far overshadows other determinants of resistance in the normal flow state. The significance of this relationship cannot be understated in light of the fact that control and regulation of microvascular blood flow is manifest by the ability of the vascular system to alter resistance in response to vasomotor adjustments. However, striking departures from Poiseuille’s relationship may dictate the outcome of