4.6 Article

A Realistic Validation Study of a New Nitrogen Multiple-Breath Washout System

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036083

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Union [270194]
  2. Vastra Gotaland Region Research Council, Sweden
  3. European Respiratory Society [81-2011]
  4. Federal Department of Economic Affairs Switzerland
  5. Commission for Technology and Innovation (CTI)
  6. Innovation Promotion Agency [11661.1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: For reliable assessment of ventilation inhomogeneity, multiple-breath washout (MBW) systems should be realistically validated. We describe a new lung model for in vitro validation under physiological conditions and the assessment of a new nitrogen (N-2) MBW system. Methods: The N2MBW setup indirectly measures the N2 fraction (FN2) from main-stream carbon dioxide (CO2) and side-stream oxygen (O-2) signals: F-N2 = 1-F-O2-F-CO2-F-Argon. For in vitro N2MBW, a double chamber plastic lung model was filled with water, heated to 37 degrees C, and ventilated at various lung volumes, respiratory rates, and F-CO2. In vivo N2MBW was undertaken in triplets on two occasions in 30 healthy adults. Primary N2MBW outcome was functional residual capacity (FRC). We assessed in vitro error (root[difference](2)) between measured and model FRC (100-4174 mL), and error between tests of in vivo FRC, lung clearance index (LCI), and normalized phase III slope indices (S-acin and S-cond). Results: The model generated 145 FRCs under BTPS conditions and various breathing patterns. Mean (SD) error was 2.3 (1.7)%. In 500 to 4174 mL FRCs, 121 (98%) of FRCs were within 5%. In 100 to 400 mL FRCs, the error was better than 7%. In vivo FRC error between tests was 10.1 (8.2)%. LCI was the most reproducible ventilation inhomogeneity index. Conclusion: The lung model generates lung volumes under the conditions encountered during clinical MBW testing and enables realistic validation of MBW systems. The new N2MBW system reliably measures lung volumes and delivers reproducible LCI values.

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