Department of Medical Sciences, Respiratory, allergy and sleep research, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala University, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Respiratory medicine and allergology, Akademiska sjukhuset, Uppsala, Sweden.
BMC Pulm Med. 2022 Nov 21;22(1):430. doi: 10.1186/s12890-022-02212-7.
Ground glass opacity (GGO) is the main HRCT feature representing alveolitis in systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD), but may also represent other conditions such as atelectasis or edema. It is unclear how much this is affected by the HRCT scan protocol used. We aimed to compare the performance of three different HRCT protocols to evaluate the degree of SSc-ILD related changes.
Eleven patients with SSc underwent chest HRCT scan by three different protocols: First, a supine scan after lying down for 15 minutes, then two scans in alternating order: A prone position scan, and a supine position scan after performing 10 deep breaths using a positive expiratory pressure (PEP) device. The HRCT scans were evaluated by the Warrick score system for ILD-related findings.
The three HRCT protocols were compared and resulted in different mean (95% CI) Warrick scores: 9.4 (5.3-13.4) in supine after rest; 7.5 (95% CI 3.8-11.1) in prone and 7.6 (95% CI 4.2-11.1) in supine after PEP. When comparing supine after rest to prone and supine after PEP, the latter two scans had a significantly lower score (p = 0.001 for both comparisons). In all cases, only sub-scores for ground glass opacities differed, while sub-scores for fibrosis-related changes did not change.
Different HRCT scan protocols significantly altered the Warrick severity score for SSc-ILD findings, primarily because of changes in ground glass opacities. These differences may be clinically meaningful.
磨玻璃密度(GGO)是系统性硬化症相关间质性肺病(SSc-ILD)中代表肺泡炎的主要 HRCT 特征,但也可能代表其他情况,如肺不张或水肿。目前尚不清楚这在多大程度上受到所使用的 HRCT 扫描方案的影响。我们旨在比较三种不同的 HRCT 方案的性能,以评估 SSc-ILD 相关变化的程度。
11 例 SSc 患者接受了三种不同方案的胸部 HRCT 扫描:首先,在躺下 15 分钟后进行仰卧位扫描,然后交替进行两种扫描:俯卧位扫描,以及使用正呼气压力(PEP)设备进行 10 次深呼吸后的仰卧位扫描。ILD 相关发现的 HRCT 扫描由 Warrick 评分系统进行评估。
三种 HRCT 方案进行了比较,得出了不同的 Warrick 评分平均值(95%CI):仰卧位休息后为 9.4(5.3-13.4);俯卧位为 7.5(95%CI 3.8-11.1);PEP 后仰卧位为 7.6(95%CI 4.2-11.1)。仰卧位休息后与俯卧位和 PEP 后仰卧位相比,后两种扫描的评分明显较低(p=0.001,两次比较均如此)。在所有情况下,只有磨玻璃密度的子评分发生了变化,而纤维化相关变化的子评分没有变化。
不同的 HRCT 扫描方案显著改变了 SSc-ILD 发现的 Warrick 严重程度评分,主要是因为磨玻璃密度的变化。这些差异可能具有临床意义。