Kang M-Y, Grebenkov D, Guénard H, Katz I, Sapoval B
Physique de la Matière Condensée, CNRS, Ecole Polytechnique, 91128 Palaiseau, France.
Laboratoire de Physiologie, Université Bordeaux 2, 33076 Bordeaux, France.
Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2017 Jul;241:62-71. doi: 10.1016/j.resp.2016.12.014. Epub 2016 Dec 31.
Roughton and Forster (RF) proposed to split the lung diffusing capacity into two contributions describing first, diffusion to red blood cells (RBC), and second, capture by diffusion from the RBC surface and reaction with haemoglobin. Solving the diffusion-reaction equations for simplified capillary-RBC structures, we investigate the RF interpretation. This reveals first that the conventional extrapolation to zero pressure of 1/DLCO on PO is not a correct measure of the diffusive component. Consequently the capillary volumes deduced from this extrapolation are erroneous. Secondly, capture mechanisms are different for CO and NO: while DLCO characterizes "volume absorption" in the RBC and is correlated with hematocrit, DLNO quantifies "surface absorption" and provide information about the morphology of the space between the alveolar surface and the RBC surfaces. In conclusion, the RF approach may lead to erroneous physiological interpretations of DLCO; nevertheless, the measurement of DLCO and DLNO bring different types of information that give the potential for a better understanding of respiratory diseases.
劳顿和福斯特(RF)提议将肺扩散容量分为两部分,第一部分描述向红细胞(RBC)的扩散,第二部分描述从RBC表面通过扩散捕获并与血红蛋白反应。通过求解简化的毛细血管 - RBC结构的扩散 - 反应方程,我们研究了RF的解释。这首先揭示了在PO上对1/DLCO常规外推到零压力并不是扩散成分的正确度量。因此,从这种外推推导得出的毛细血管容积是错误的。其次,CO和NO的捕获机制不同:虽然DLCO表征RBC中的“容积吸收”并与血细胞比容相关,但DLNO量化“表面吸收”并提供有关肺泡表面和RBC表面之间空间形态的信息。总之,RF方法可能导致对DLCO的错误生理学解释;然而,DLCO和DLNO的测量带来了不同类型的信息,为更好地理解呼吸系统疾病提供了潜力。