The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume 119, Issue 5 , Pages 1072-1078, May 2007

The variability of regional airflow obstruction within the lungs of patients with asthma: Assessment with hyperpolarized helium-3 magnetic resonance imaging

  • Eduard E. de Lange, MD

      Affiliations

    • From the Departments of Radiology
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Eduard E. de Lange, MD, Department of Radiology, HSC 800170, University of Virginia Health Sciences System, Charlottesville, VA 22908.
  • ,
  • Talissa A. Altes, MD

      Affiliations

    • From the Departments of Radiology
    • Dr Altes is currently affiliated with the Department of Radiology, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pa.
  • ,
  • James T. Patrie, MS

      Affiliations

    • Health Evaluation Sciences
  • ,
  • Jaywant Parmar, MD

      Affiliations

    • From the Departments of Radiology
  • ,
  • James R. Brookeman, PhD

      Affiliations

    • From the Departments of Radiology
  • ,
  • John P. Mugler III, PhD

      Affiliations

    • From the Departments of Radiology
  • ,
  • Thomas A.E. Platts-Mills, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Internal Medicine, Division of Asthma, Allergy, and Immunology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville

Received 5 September 2006; received in revised form 1 December 2006; accepted 19 December 2006. published online 15 March 2007.

Charlottesville, Va

Background

It is unknown whether focal changes of airflow obstruction within the lungs of patients with asthma vary or are fixed in location with time or repeated bronchoconstriction. With hyperpolarized helium-3 magnetic resonance (H3HeMR) imaging, the airspaces are depicted and focal areas of airflow obstruction are shown as “ventilation defects.”

Objective

To investigate the regional changes of airflow obstruction with time and repeated bronchoconstriction.

Methods

H3HeMR and spirometry were performed before (pre) and immediately after (post) methacholine challenge in 10 young patients with asthma on 2 days that were 7-476 days (mean, 185.3 ± 37.2 days) apart. Pair-wise image comparisons were performed to determine the change in location of ventilation defects within the lung and their change in size.

Results

When comparing premethacholine versus premethacholine and postmethacholine versus post-methacholine images of the 2 days, 41% ± 10% and 69% ± 5% (P = .017) of defects, respectively, were in the same location, and of those, 69% ± 12% and 43% ± 5% (P = .022), respectively, did not change size. Comparing premethacholine versus postmethacholine images, 58% ± 9% of defects were in the same location on day 1 and 73% ± 7% (P = .088) on day 2. On both days, the percent increase in defect number from premethacholine to postmethacholine was much greater than the percent decrease in spirometric values (P < .001).

Conclusion

Many of the ventilation defects persisted or recurred in the same location with time or repeated bronchoconstriction, suggesting that the regional changes of airflow obstruction are relatively fixed within the lung.

Clinical implications

The findings give new insight into the regional airflow variability within the lungs of patients with asthma.

Key words: Airflow obstruction, airway, asthma, bronchial activity, hyperpolarized gases, hyperpolarized helium-3, pulmonary function, spirometry, magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, ventilation defect, ventilation, lung diseases

Abbreviations used: FEF25-75, Forced expiratory flow at 25% to 75% of forced vital capacity, FVC, Forced vital capacity, H3He, Hyperpolarized helium-3, H3HeMR, Hyperpolarized helium-3 magnetic resonance, MCT, Methacholine challenge test, MRI, Magnetic resonance imaging, NAEPP, National Asthma Education and Prevention Program of the National Institutes of Health, VDS, Number of ventilation defects per slice

 

 Supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health (grant RO1 HL 66479), the Commonwealth of Virginia Technology Research Fund (grant IN2002-01), and Siemens Medical Solutions.Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: J. R. Brookeman and J. P Mugler have received grant support from Siemens Medical Solutions. The rest of the authors have declared that they have no conflict of interest.

PII: S0091-6749(07)00161-3

doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2006.12.659

The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume 119, Issue 5 , Pages 1072-1078, May 2007