4.6 Article

Hyperpolarized 129Xe MR Imaging of Alveolar Gas Uptake in Humans

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 5, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012192

关键词

-

资金

  1. GE Healthcare
  2. Duke Center for In Vivo Microscopy
  3. National Institutes of Health/National Center for Research Resources National Biomedical Technology Research Center [P41 RR005959]
  4. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) [R21 HL087094]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: One of the central physiological functions of the lungs is to transfer inhaled gases from the alveoli to pulmonary capillary blood. However, current measures of alveolar gas uptake provide only global information and thus lack the sensitivity and specificity needed to account for regional variations in gas exchange. Methods and Principal Findings: Here we exploit the solubility, high magnetic resonance (MR) signal intensity, and large chemical shift of hyperpolarized (HP) Xe-129 to probe the regional uptake of alveolar gases by directly imaging HP Xe-129 dissolved in the gas exchange tissues and pulmonary capillary blood of human subjects. The resulting single breath-hold, three-dimensional MR images are optimized using millisecond repetition times and high flip angle radio-frequency pulses, because the dissolved HP Xe-129 magnetization is rapidly replenished by diffusive exchange with alveolar Xe-129. The dissolved HP Xe-129 MR images display significant, directional heterogeneity, with increased signal intensity observed from the gravity-dependent portions of the lungs. Conclusions: The features observed in dissolved-phase Xe-129 MR images are consistent with gravity-dependent lung deformation, which produces increased ventilation, reduced alveolar size (i.e., higher surface-to-volume ratios), higher tissue densities, and increased perfusion in the dependent portions of the lungs. Thus, these results suggest that dissolved HP Xe-129 imaging reports on pulmonary function at a fundamental level.

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

4.6
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