Validating the distribution of specific ventilation in healthy humans measured using proton MR imaging

• Published in: Journal of applied physiology (1985) Vol. 116; no. 8; pp. 1048 - 1056
• Main Authors: Sá, Rui Carlos, Asadi, Amran K, Theilmann, Rebecca J, Hopkins, Susan R, Prisk, G Kim, Darquenne, Chantal
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Physiological Society 15-04-2014
• Subjects: Adult; Comparative analysis; Contrast Media; Female; Forced Expiratory Volume - physiology; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data; Male; Middle Aged; NMR; Nuclear magnetic resonance; Oxygen; Oxygen - physiology; Protons; Pulmonary Ventilation - physiology; Reference Values; Reliability; Reproducibility of Results; Tidal Volume - physiology; Young Adult; oxygen-enhanced MRI; respiration; multiple-breath washout; technique validation; specific ventilation
• ISSN: 8750-7587; 1522-1601
• DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00982.2013

Specific ventilation imaging (SVI) uses proton MRI to quantitatively map the distribution of specific ventilation (SV) in the human lung, using inhaled oxygen as a contrast agent. To validate this recent technique, we compared the quantitative measures of heterogeneity of the SV distribution in a 15-mm sagittal slice of lung obtained in 10 healthy supine subjects, (age 37 ± 10 yr, forced expiratory volume in 1 s 97 ± 7% predicted) using SVI to those obtained in the whole lung from multiple-breath nitrogen washout (MBW). Using the analysis of Lewis et al. (Lewis SM, Evans JW, Jalowayski AA. J App Physiol 44: 416-423, 1978), the most likely distribution of SV from the MBW data was computed and compared with the distribution of SV obtained from SVI, after normalizing for the difference in tidal volume. The average SV was 0.30 ± 0.10 MBW, compared with 0.36 ± 0.10 SVI (P = 0.01). The width of the distribution, a measure of the heterogeneity, obtained using both methods was comparable: 0.51 ± 0.06 and 0.47 ± 0.08 in MBW and SVI, respectively (P = 0.15). The MBW estimated width of the SV distribution was 0.05 (10.7%) higher than that estimated using SVI, and smaller than the intertest variability of the MBW estimation [inter-MBW (SD) for the width of the SV distribution was 0.08 (15.8)%]. To assess reliability, SVI was performed twice on 13 subjects showing small differences between measurements of SV heterogeneity (typical error 0.05, 12%). In conclusion, quantitative estimations of SV heterogeneity from SVI are reliable and similar to those obtained using MBW, with SVI providing spatial information that is absent in MBW.