• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.555-568
• /
• 1995

Background: It is most physiologic to measure the diffusing capacity of the lung by using oxygen, but it is so difficult to measure partial pressure of oxygen in the capillary blood of the lung that in clinical practice it is measured by using carbon monoxide, and single-breath diffusing capacity method is used most widely. However, since the process of withholding the breath for 10 seconds after inspiration to the total lung capacity is very hard to practice for patients who suffer from cough, dyspnea, etc, the intra-breath lung diffusing capacity method which requires a single exhalation of low-flow rate without such process was devised. In this study, we want to know whether or not there is any significant difference in the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by the single-breath and intra-breath methods, and if any, which factors have any influence. Methods: We chose randomly 73 persons without regarding specific disease, and after conducting 3 times the flow-volume curve test, we selected forced vital capacity(FVC), percent of predicted forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume within 1 second($FEV_1$), percent of forced expiratory volume within 1 second, the ratio of forced expiratory volume within 1 second against forced vital capacity($FEV_1$/FVC) in test which the sum of FVC and $FEV_1$ is biggest. We measured the diffusing capacity of the lung 3 times in each of the single-breath and intra-breath methods at intervals of 5 minutes, and we evaluated which factors have any influence on the difference of the diffusing capacity of the lung between two methods[the mean values(ml/min/mmHg) of difference between two diffusing capacity measured by two methods] by means of the linear regression method, and obtained the following results: Results: 1) Intra-test reproducibility in the single-breath and intra-breath methods was excellent. 2) There was in general a good correlation between the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by a single-breath method and that measured by the intra-breath method, but there was a significant difference between values measured by both methods($1.01{\pm}0.35ml/min/mmHg$, p<0.01) 3) The difference between the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by both methods was not correlated to FVC, but was correlated to $FEV_1$, percent of $FEV_1$, $FEV_1$/FVC and the gradient of methane concentration which is an indicator of distribution of ventilation, and it was found as a result of the multiple regression test, that the effect of $FEV_1$/FVC was most strong(r=-0.4725, p<0.01) 4) In a graphic view of the difference of diffusing capacity measured by single-breath and intra-breath method and $FEV_1$/FVC, it was found that the former was divided into two groups in section where $FEV_1$/FVC is 50~60%, and that there was no significant difference between two methods in the section where $FEV_1$/FVC is equal or more than 60% ($0.05{\pm}0.24ml/min/mmHg$, p>0.1), but there was significant difference in the section, less than 60%($-4.5{\pm}0.34ml/min/mmHg$, p<0.01). 5. The diffusing capacity of the lung measured by the single-breath and intra-breath method was the same in value($24.3{\pm}0.68ml/min/mmHg$) within the normal range(2%/L) of the methane gas gradient, and there was no difference depending on the measuring method, but if the methane concentration gradients exceed 2%/L, the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by single-breath method became $15.0{\pm}0.44ml/min/mmHg$, and that measured by intra-breath method, $11.9{\pm}0.51ml/min/mmHg$, and there was a significant difference between them(p<0.01). Conclusion: Therefore, in case where $FEV_1$/FVC was less than 60%, the diffusing capacity of the lung measured by intra-breath method represented significantly lower value than that by single-breath method, and it was presumed to be caused largely by a defect of ventilation-distribution, but the possibility could not be excluded that the diffusing capacity of the lung might be overestimated in the single-breath method, or the actual reduction of the diffusing capacity of the lung appeared more sensitively in the intra-breath method.

• Korean Journal of Radiology
• /
• v.22 no.8
• /
• pp.1266-1278
• /
• 2021

Objective: We aimed to compare the aortic valve area (AVA) calculated using fast high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance (MR) image acquisition with that of the conventional two-dimensional (2D) cine MR technique. Materials and Methods: We included 139 consecutive patients (mean age ± standard deviation [SD], 68.5 ± 9.4 years) with aortic valvular stenosis (AS) and 21 asymptomatic controls (52.3 ± 14.2 years). High-resolution T2-prepared 3D steady-state free precession (SSFP) images (2.0 mm slice thickness, 10 contiguous slices) for 3D planimetry (3DP) were acquired with a single breath hold during mid-systole. 2D SSFP cine MR images (6.0 mm slice thickness) for 2D planimetry (2DP) were also obtained at three aortic valve levels. The calculations for the effective AVA based on the MR images were compared with the transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) measurements using the continuity equation. Results: The mean AVA ± SD derived by 3DP, 2DP, and TTE in the AS group were 0.81 ± 0.26 cm², 0.82 ± 0.34 cm², and 0.80 ± 0.26 cm², respectively (p = 0.366). The intra-observer agreement was higher for 3DP than 2DP in one observer: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-0.97) and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82-0.91), respectively, for observer 1 and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.96-0.98) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99), respectively, for observer 2. Inter-observer agreement was similar between 3DP and 2DP, with the ICC of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89-0.94) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88-0.93), respectively. 3DP-derived AVA showed a slightly higher agreement with AVA measured by TTE than the 2DP-derived AVA, with the ICC of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82-0.91) vs. 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.89). Conclusion: High-resolution 3D MR image acquisition, with single-breath-hold SSFP sequences, gave AVA measurement with low observer variability that correlated highly with those obtained by TTE.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.43-49
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study examined changes in the position of the heat and lungs depending on the patient's breathing method during left breast cancer radiotherapy and used treatment plans to compare the resulting radiation dose. Materials and methods: The participants consisted of 10 patients with left breast cancer. A CT simulator(SIMENS SOMATOM AS, Germany) was used to obtain images when using three different breathing methods: free breathing(FB), deep inspiration breath hold(DIBH with Abches, DIBH), inspiration breath hold(IBH with CPAP, CPAP). A Ray Station(5.0.2.35, Sweden) was used for treatment planning, the treatment method was volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with one partial arc of the same angle, and the prescribed dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was a total dose of 50Gy(2Gy/day). In treatment plan analysis, the 95% dose (D95) to the PTV, the conformity index(CI), and the homogeneity index (HI) were compared. The lungs, heart, and left anterior descending artery (LAD) were selected as the organs at risk(OARs). Results: The mean volume of the ipsilateral lung for FB, DIBH, and CPAP was 1245.58±301.31㎤, 1790.09±362.43 ㎤, 1775.44±476.71 ㎤. The mean D95 for the PTV was 46.67±1.89Gy, 46.85±1.72Gy, 46.97±23.4Gy, and the mean CI and HI were 0.95±0.02, 0.96±0.02, 0.95±0.02 and 0.91±0.01, 0.90±0.01, 0.92±0.02. The V20 of Whole Lung was 10.74±4.50%, 8.29±3.14%, 9.12±3.29% and The V20 of the ipsilateral lung was 20.45±8.65%, 17.18±7.04%, 18.85±7.85%, the Dmean of the heart was 7.82±1.27Gy, 6.10±1.27Gy, 5.67±1.56Gy, and the Dmax of the LAD was 20.41±7.56Gy, 14.88±3.57Gy, 14.96±2.81Gy. The distance from the thoracic wall to the LAD was measured to be 11.33±4.70mm, 22.40±6.01mm, 20.14±6.23mm. Conclusion: During left breast cancer radiotherapy, the lung volume was 46.24% larger for DIBH than for FB, and 43.11% larger for CPAP than FB. The larger lung volume increases the distance between the thoracic wall and the heart. In this way, the LAD, which is one of the nearby OARs, can be more effectively protected while still satisfying the treatment plan. The lung volume was largest for DIBH, and the distance between the LAD and thoracic wall was also the greatest. However, when performing treatment with DIBH, the intra-fraction error cannot be ignored. Moreover, communication between the patient and the radiotherapist is also an important factor in DIBH treatment. When communication is problematic, or if the patient has difficulty holding their breath, we believe that CPAP could be used as an alternative to DIBH. In order to verify the clinical efficacy of CPAP, it will be necessary to perform long-term follow-up of a greater number of patients.