| Literature DB >> 33008396 |
Kyung Min Shin1, Jiwoong Choi2,3, Kum Ju Chae4, Gong Yong Jin4, Ali Eskandari5, Eric A Hoffman5,6,7, Chase Hall2, Mario Castro2, Chang Hyun Lee8,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggested that the prone position (PP) improves oxygenation and reduces mortality among patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the mechanism of this clinical benefit of PP is not completely understood. The aim of the present study was to quantitatively compare regional characteristics of lung functions in the PP with those in the supine position (SP) using inspiratory and expiratory computed tomography (CT) scans.Entities:
Keywords: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); Lung motionography; Prone positioning; Quantitative computed tomography (QCT)
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33008396 PMCID: PMC7531138 DOI: 10.1186/s12931-020-01519-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Respir Res ISSN: 1465-9921
Fig. 1Flow chart of the steps involved from image acquisition to the regional lung functional maps, and further to the comparison between supine and prone groups
Fig. 2Demonstration of inspiratory (a and d) and expiratory (b and e) tissue fraction (TFIN and TFEX, respectively) maps and local expansion (J) map (c and f) in supine (a-c) and prone (d-f) positions. TFIN, TFEX, and J were computed in local lung parenchymal volumetric units at an acinar scale and were colored according to a rainbow scale. TFIN and TFEX are plotted in the same scale for comparison between inspiration and expiration. Since the summation of both air and tissue fractions is equal to unity, the decrease in tissue fraction implies an increase in air fraction. J is computed as inspiratory-to-expiratory volume ratio at matched parenchymal units
Results of Tissue Fractions in Prone Versus Supine Positions
| Variable | Region | Prone | Supine | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TFIN | Upper | 0.151 | 0.150 | 0.713 |
| RML | 0.167 | 0.142 | 1.8 × 10−3 | |
| Lower | 0.147 | 0.163 | 0.003 | |
| TFEX | Upper | 0.253 | 0.235 | 0.127 |
| RML | 0.277 | 0.211 | 1.5 × 10−6 | |
| Lower | 0.243 | 0.295 | 0.001 |
All values are expressed as means. RML Right middle lobe, TF Tissue fraction on inspiratory scan, TF Tissue fraction on expiratory scan
Upper to Lower Lobes Ratio of TFIN, TFEX, and J in Prone Versus Supine Positions
| Variable | UM/L | U/ML | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prone | Supine | Prone | Supine | |||
| TFIN | 1.06 | 0.91 | 1.4 × 10−12 | 1.02 | 0.94 | 2.1 × 10− 8 |
| TFEX | 1.06 | 0.79 | 3.6 × 10− 19 | 1.02 | 0.84 | 3.7 × 10−17 |
| 1.00 | 0.86 | 2.4 × 10−24 | 1.01 | 0.89 | 2.1 × 10−19 | |
| RRAVC | 0.99 | 0.61 | 6.6 × 10−4 | 0.98 | 0.78 | 4.8 × 10−9 |
All values are expressed as means. J Jacobian, RRAVC Relative regional air volume change, TF Tissue fraction on expiratory scan, TF Tissue fraction on inspiratory scan, U/ML Ratio of variables of upper lobe to those of middle and lower lobes, UM/L Ratio of variable of upper and middle lobes to that of lower lobe
Regional volume expansion ratio and air volume change in prone versus supine positions
| Variable | Region | Prone | Supine | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LUL | 1.613 | 1.551 | 0.301 | |
| LLL | 1.600 | 1.809 | 0.001 | |
| RUL | 1.598 | 1.552 | 0.448 | |
| RML | 1.567 | 1.447 | 0.025 | |
| RLL | 1.597 | 1.797 | 0.002 | |
| RRAVC | LUL | 1.040 | 0.891 | 7.6 × 10−7 |
| LLL | 1.069 | 1.270 | 4.8 × 10− 7 | |
| RUL | 1.012 | 0.890 | 6.4 × 10−4 | |
| RML | 1.049 | 0.713 | 4.4 × 10−19 | |
| RLL | 1.058 | 1.279 | 7.2 × 10−4 |
All values are expressed as means. J Jacobian, LLL Left lower lobe, LUL Left upper lobe, RLL Right lower lobe, RML Right middle lobe, RRAVC Relative regional air volume change, RUL Right upper lobe
Fig. 3Demonstration of regional lung motionography in supine and prone positions. Displacement vectors from expiration to inspiration (a and b) and normalized 3D displacement magnitude maps on entire lung regions (c and d) in supine position (a and c) and prone position (b and d). For visual interpretation, three-dimensional displacement vectors were plotted and colored according to a rainbow scale by s*
Fig. 4Bottom view comparison of displacement vector distributions in (a) supine and (b) prone positions of the same subject (M, 53 yr) for demonstration
Fig. 5Demonstration of RRAVC between supine (a) and prone (b) positions from five directions (right, front, left, back, and bottom). RRAVC was computed in local lung parenchymal volumetric units at an acinar scale and was colored according to a rainbow scale. A region with an RRAVC value greater (or less) than 1 receives more (or less) ventilation than the mean over the whole lung. RRAVC, relative regional air volume changes