4.5 Article

Quantification of Human Lung Structure and Physiology Using Hyperpolarized 129Xe

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
卷 71, 期 1, 页码 339-344

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.24992

关键词

lung physiology; barrier thickness; surface-area-to-volume ratio; Fahraeus effect; field-dependent chemical shift

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [HL087550, HL090806, R44HL112397]
  2. Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeTo present in vivo, human validation of a previously proposed method to measure key pulmonary parameters related to lung microstructure and physiology. Some parameters, such as blood-air barrier thickness, cannot be measured readily by any other noninvasive modality. MethodsHealthy volunteers (n = 12) were studied in 1.5T and 3T whole body human scanners using hyperpolarized xenon. Xenon uptake by lung parenchyma and blood was measured using a chemical shift saturation recovery sequence. Both dissolved-xenon peaks at 197 ppm and 217-218 ppm were fitted against a model of xenon exchange (MOXE) as functions of exchange time. Parameters related to lung function and structure can be obtained by fitting to this model. ResultsThe following results were obtained from xenon uptake (averaged over all healthy volunteers): surface-area-to-volume ratio = 210 50 cm(-1); total septal wall thickness = 9.2 +/- 6.5 m; blood-air barrier thickness = 1.0 +/- 0.3 m; hematocrit = 27 +/- 4%; pulmonary capillary blood transit time = 1.3 +/- 0.3 s, in good agreement with literature values from invasive experiments. More detailed fitting results are listed in the text. ConclusionThe initial in vivo human results demonstrate that our proposed methods can be used to noninvasively determine lung physiology by simultaneous quantification of a few important pulmonary parameters. This method is highly promising to become a versatile screening method for lung diseases. Magn Reson Med 71:339-344, 2014. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据