No difference was shown, however, after local heating on the finger pad [44]. Gender is another concern when studying microvascular function. Hormone level variations across the physiological menstrual cycle or due to the OCP regimen affect endothelium-dependent vasodilation of conductance arteries in different ways, depending on the OCP formulation [96,135,136]. The effect of the phase of the menstrual cycle or of OCPs on microvascular function has been explored with conflicting results. Resting cutaneous blood flux and conductance are affected by gender, females having lower values than
males [62]. In the same way, local heating induces a lower increase in females than in males [62]. The menstrual cycle did not influence microvascular reactivity assessed by the iontophoresis of ACh and beta-catenin signaling SNP combined with laser Doppler [78]. However, a recent controlled study has shown a small increase in the initial LTH peak after the administration of 17-β-estradiol, progesterone, and a combination in young women in whom the sex hormones were suppressed with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist,
whereas there was no effect on the LTH plateau or PORH [14]. Finally, healthy females showed greater vasoconstriction due to local cooling than males, the response being more pronounced during the luteal phase than during the follicular phase [18]. The influence of female hormone levels across menstrual cycle or OCP on microvascular find more reactivity deserves further exploration, but it could introduce a confounding factor in studies [24]. Age, gender, phase of the menstrual cycle, and contraception should be taken into account to limit bias in controlled studies, by appropriate matching or randomization. Finally, vasoactive drugs and cigarette smoking also affect microvascular function [28,85] and should therefore be avoided where possible. As previously mentioned, skin site influences the study of microvascular mafosfamide reactivity. The spatial variability of single-point LDF results has been described for almost three decades
[129]. Braverman explained the variability of the signal by the anatomy of the underlying vasculature. Indeed, a high skin blood flux corresponds to underlying ascending arterioles, whereas lower flux indicates venular predominance [11]. As skin arterioles are separated by an average of 1.7 mm on the forearm [11], flux may vary consistently according to the position of the LDF probe. This is the cause of the poor inter-day reproducibility of single-point LDF discussed above, which is a limitation of the technique. On the finger pad, however (and on non-glabrous skin in general), the skin contains a high proportion of arteriovenous anastomoses, making baseline flux highly variable over time when assessed with single-point LDF.