焦点指数:COVID-19急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者形态亚表型的定量方法:一项初步研究

IF 2.8 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Kristin Jona Bjarnadottir, Martin Tovedal, Gaetano Perchiazzi, Miklos Lipcsey, Lucian Covaciu, Magnus von Seth, Rafael Kawati, Mariangela Pellegrini
{"title":"焦点指数:COVID-19急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者形态亚表型的定量方法:一项初步研究","authors":"Kristin Jona Bjarnadottir, Martin Tovedal, Gaetano Perchiazzi, Miklos Lipcsey, Lucian Covaciu, Magnus von Seth, Rafael Kawati, Mariangela Pellegrini","doi":"10.1186/s40635-025-00794-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterised by significant morphological heterogeneity. Morphological sub-phenotyping can potentially be used to personalise mechanical ventilation. Current methods to classify lung injury as focal or diffuse rely on subjective image interpretation, which risks misclassification and suboptimal treatment. This study aimed to investigate the morphological appearance features of lung injury objectively. The focal index, an objective quantitative tool, was introduced to assess focality in lung injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-centre retrospective study, we included lung computed tomography (CT) scans from COVID-19 ARDS patients on invasive mechanical ventilation, classified as diffuse lung injury. CT data were analysed to extract regional Hounsfield Unit (HU) profiles across nine predefined lung areas. The focal index was derived by quantifying the non-overlapping area under HU distribution curves between the apical ventral and diaphragmatic dorsal regions. Correlations with lung weight, gas volume, and ventilatory settings were assessed. For validation, at least two experienced ICU consultants assessed the same images and determined whether ARDS was of a diffuse or focal type. The experts classified 36 out of 37 patients as diffuse ARDS, with substantial interobserver agreement (k = 0.65, 95% CI 0.02-1.00).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The focal index demonstrated a wide range (25-175; mean 95.5 ± standard deviation 42.8), correlating significantly with the dorsal diaphragmatic non-aerated area (r = 0.67, p < 0.01) and with total gas volume (r = - 0.36, p = 0.03). There was no significant influence of ventilatory settings on the focal index.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The analysis suggested diffuse lung injury includes a spectrum of focality rather than a binary classification. The focal index provides an objective method to quantify the focality of lung injury in ARDS. Further studies are needed to validate the focal index across diverse ARDS aetiologies and establish its clinical application threshold for guiding personalised ventilation strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":13750,"journal":{"name":"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental","volume":"13 1","pages":"81"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12334779/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The focal index: a quantitative approach to morphological sub-phenotyping of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a pilot study.\",\"authors\":\"Kristin Jona Bjarnadottir, Martin Tovedal, Gaetano Perchiazzi, Miklos Lipcsey, Lucian Covaciu, Magnus von Seth, Rafael Kawati, Mariangela Pellegrini\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40635-025-00794-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterised by significant morphological heterogeneity. Morphological sub-phenotyping can potentially be used to personalise mechanical ventilation. Current methods to classify lung injury as focal or diffuse rely on subjective image interpretation, which risks misclassification and suboptimal treatment. This study aimed to investigate the morphological appearance features of lung injury objectively. The focal index, an objective quantitative tool, was introduced to assess focality in lung injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-centre retrospective study, we included lung computed tomography (CT) scans from COVID-19 ARDS patients on invasive mechanical ventilation, classified as diffuse lung injury. CT data were analysed to extract regional Hounsfield Unit (HU) profiles across nine predefined lung areas. The focal index was derived by quantifying the non-overlapping area under HU distribution curves between the apical ventral and diaphragmatic dorsal regions. Correlations with lung weight, gas volume, and ventilatory settings were assessed. For validation, at least two experienced ICU consultants assessed the same images and determined whether ARDS was of a diffuse or focal type. The experts classified 36 out of 37 patients as diffuse ARDS, with substantial interobserver agreement (k = 0.65, 95% CI 0.02-1.00).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The focal index demonstrated a wide range (25-175; mean 95.5 ± standard deviation 42.8), correlating significantly with the dorsal diaphragmatic non-aerated area (r = 0.67, p < 0.01) and with total gas volume (r = - 0.36, p = 0.03). There was no significant influence of ventilatory settings on the focal index.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The analysis suggested diffuse lung injury includes a spectrum of focality rather than a binary classification. The focal index provides an objective method to quantify the focality of lung injury in ARDS. Further studies are needed to validate the focal index across diverse ARDS aetiologies and establish its clinical application threshold for guiding personalised ventilation strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13750,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"81\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12334779/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-025-00794-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive Care Medicine Experimental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40635-025-00794-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)具有明显的形态学异质性。形态亚表型可以潜在地用于个性化机械通气。目前将肺损伤分类为局灶性或弥漫性的方法依赖于主观的图像解释,这存在分类错误和治疗不理想的风险。本研究旨在客观地探讨肺损伤的形态学特征。引入病灶指数这一客观的定量工具来评价肺损伤的病灶性。方法:在这项单中心回顾性研究中,我们纳入了有创机械通气的COVID-19 ARDS患者的肺部计算机断层扫描(CT),分类为弥漫性肺损伤。对CT数据进行分析,以提取九个预定义肺区域的区域性Hounsfield Unit (HU)剖面。焦点指数是通过量化HU分布曲线下顶端腹侧区和膈背侧区之间的非重叠区域而得出的。评估与肺重量、气量和通气设置的相关性。为了验证,至少有两名经验丰富的ICU顾问评估相同的图像并确定ARDS是弥漫性还是局灶性。专家将37例患者中的36例分类为弥漫性ARDS,观察者之间的一致性很大(k = 0.65, 95% CI 0.02-1.00)。结果:焦指数范围广(25 ~ 175;平均95.5±标准差42.8),与背膈非通气面积显著相关(r = 0.67, p)。结论:分析提示弥漫性肺损伤包括病灶谱,而不是二元分类。病灶指数为量化ARDS肺损伤病灶性提供了一种客观的方法。需要进一步的研究来验证不同ARDS病因的病灶指数,并确定其临床应用阈值,以指导个性化通气策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The focal index: a quantitative approach to morphological sub-phenotyping of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a pilot study.

The focal index: a quantitative approach to morphological sub-phenotyping of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a pilot study.

The focal index: a quantitative approach to morphological sub-phenotyping of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a pilot study.

The focal index: a quantitative approach to morphological sub-phenotyping of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a pilot study.

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterised by significant morphological heterogeneity. Morphological sub-phenotyping can potentially be used to personalise mechanical ventilation. Current methods to classify lung injury as focal or diffuse rely on subjective image interpretation, which risks misclassification and suboptimal treatment. This study aimed to investigate the morphological appearance features of lung injury objectively. The focal index, an objective quantitative tool, was introduced to assess focality in lung injury.

Methods: In this single-centre retrospective study, we included lung computed tomography (CT) scans from COVID-19 ARDS patients on invasive mechanical ventilation, classified as diffuse lung injury. CT data were analysed to extract regional Hounsfield Unit (HU) profiles across nine predefined lung areas. The focal index was derived by quantifying the non-overlapping area under HU distribution curves between the apical ventral and diaphragmatic dorsal regions. Correlations with lung weight, gas volume, and ventilatory settings were assessed. For validation, at least two experienced ICU consultants assessed the same images and determined whether ARDS was of a diffuse or focal type. The experts classified 36 out of 37 patients as diffuse ARDS, with substantial interobserver agreement (k = 0.65, 95% CI 0.02-1.00).

Results: The focal index demonstrated a wide range (25-175; mean 95.5 ± standard deviation 42.8), correlating significantly with the dorsal diaphragmatic non-aerated area (r = 0.67, p < 0.01) and with total gas volume (r = - 0.36, p = 0.03). There was no significant influence of ventilatory settings on the focal index.

Conclusions: The analysis suggested diffuse lung injury includes a spectrum of focality rather than a binary classification. The focal index provides an objective method to quantify the focality of lung injury in ARDS. Further studies are needed to validate the focal index across diverse ARDS aetiologies and establish its clinical application threshold for guiding personalised ventilation strategies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
48
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信