Korean journal of radiology · 2020
Visual and Quantitative Assessments of Regional Xenon-Ventilation Using Dual-Energy CT in Asthma-Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Overlap Syndrome: A Comparison with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hwang Hye Jeon, Lee Sang Min, Seo Joon Beom, Lee Jae Seung, Kim Namkug, Lee Sei Won, Oh Yeon Mok
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the regional ventilation in patients with asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) overlap syndrome (ACOS) using xenon-ventilation dual-energy CT (DECT), and to compare it to that in patients with COPD.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with ACOS and 46 patients with COPD underwent xenon-ventilation DECT. The ventilation abnormalities were visually determined to be 1) peripheral wedge/diffuse defect, 2) diffuse heterogeneous defect, 3) lobar/segmental/subsegmental defect, and 4) no defect on xenon-ventilation maps. Emphysema index (EI), airway wall thickness (Pi10), and mean ventilation values in the whole lung, peripheral lung, and central lung areas were quantified and compared between the two groups using the Student's t test.
RESULTS: Most patients with ACOS showed the peripheral wedge/diffuse defect (n = 14, 66.7%), whereas patients with COPD commonly showed the diffuse heterogeneous defect and lobar/segmental/subsegmental defect (n = 21, 45.7% and n = 20, 43.5%, respectively). The prevalence of ventilation defect patterns showed significant intergroup differences (p < 0.001). The quantified ventilation values in the peripheral lung areas were significantly lower in patients with ACOS than in patients with COPD (p = 0.045). The quantified Pi10 was significantly higher in patients with ACOS than in patients with COPD (p = 0.041); however, EI was not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: The ventilation abnormalities on the visual and quantitative assessments of xenon-ventilation DECT differed between patients with ACOS and patients with COPD. Xenon-ventilation DECT may demonstrate the different physiologic changes of pulmonary ventilation in patients with ACOS and COPD.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with ACOS and 46 patients with COPD underwent xenon-ventilation DECT. The ventilation abnormalities were visually determined to be 1) peripheral wedge/diffuse defect, 2) diffuse heterogeneous defect, 3) lobar/segmental/subsegmental defect, and 4) no defect on xenon-ventilation maps. Emphysema index (EI), airway wall thickness (Pi10), and mean ventilation values in the whole lung, peripheral lung, and central lung areas were quantified and compared between the two groups using the Student's t test.
RESULTS: Most patients with ACOS showed the peripheral wedge/diffuse defect (n = 14, 66.7%), whereas patients with COPD commonly showed the diffuse heterogeneous defect and lobar/segmental/subsegmental defect (n = 21, 45.7% and n = 20, 43.5%, respectively). The prevalence of ventilation defect patterns showed significant intergroup differences (p < 0.001). The quantified ventilation values in the peripheral lung areas were significantly lower in patients with ACOS than in patients with COPD (p = 0.045). The quantified Pi10 was significantly higher in patients with ACOS than in patients with COPD (p = 0.041); however, EI was not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: The ventilation abnormalities on the visual and quantitative assessments of xenon-ventilation DECT differed between patients with ACOS and patients with COPD. Xenon-ventilation DECT may demonstrate the different physiologic changes of pulmonary ventilation in patients with ACOS and COPD.