Skip to main content
. 2012 Jan 20;302(6):H1261–H1273. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00776.2011

Table 3.

Hemodynamics across the mouse fetoplacental tree

CD1 Mice
B6 Mice
Associated Variables/Calculations E13.5 E15.5 E17.5 E13.5 E15.5 E17.5
Mean umbilical artery pressure drop (estimated), mmHg P 3 6 11 3 6 11
Mean umbilical artery blood velocity (estimated; Vmean), mm/s Vmean 25 25 31 30 30 34
Umbilical artery diameter from micro-CT data, mm d 0.32 ± 0.02a 0.46 ± 0.01b 0.54 ± 0.01c 0.39 ± 0.02a,* 0.51 ± 0.02b 0.50 ± 0.01b
Umbilical artery flow (calculated), mm3/s Q = Vmean[π(d/2)2] 2.0 4.1 7.1 3.6 6.1 6.8
Pressure drop across the arterial tree, mmHg Parterial 1.06 ± 0.09a 1.69 ± 0.19a 2.97 ± 0.50b 1.42 ± 0.13a 1.85 ± 0.10b 1.28 ± 0.12b,**
Fetal placental resistance, mmHg·s·μl−1 Rtotal = P/Q 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.8 1.0 1.6
Resistance from micro-CT data, mmHg·s·μl−1 Rarterial 0.52 ± 0.04a 0.41 ± 0.05b 0.42 ± 0.07b 0.39 ± 0.04a 0.30 ± 0.02b 0.19 ± 0.02c,**
Capillary and venous resistance, mmHg·s·μl−1 Rcap+veins = RtotalRarterial 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.4 0.7 1.4

Data are means ± SE; n = 7-10 placentas/group. micro-CT, microcomputed tomography.

Estimated from the literature.

a,b,c

Different letters show a significant difference between gestational ages (P < 0.05);

*

P < 0.05 and

**

P < 0.001, significant differences between strains at the same gestational age as determined by two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc tests. No statistical tests were performed on estimated values or calculated values that involved estimates.