Airway Responses to Bronchoprovocation Using High-Resolution Computed Tomography in Patients with Bronchial Asthma.
10.4046/trd.1995.42.6.813
- Author:
Byoung Whui CHOI
1
;
Yoon Jeong KANG
;
Hyung Ki KO
;
In Won PARK
;
Yang Soo KIM
;
Young Goo KIM
;
Sung Ho HUE
;
Kun Sang KIM
;
Jong Hyo KIM
Author Information
1. Deptment of Internal Medicine, Chung-Ang Univeristy College of Medicine Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Bronchoprovocation;
High-Resolution
- MeSH:
Anatomic Landmarks;
Asthma*;
Bronchoconstriction;
Bronchography;
Constriction;
Humans;
Inhalation;
Lung;
Methacholine Chloride
- From:Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
1995;42(6):813-822
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Bronchial hyperresponsiveness and abnormal response such as a loss of distensi- bility are pathophysiologic characteristics if bronchial asthma. The only means of direct in vivo measurement of airway size had been a tantalium bronchography, until high-resolution computed tomography(HRCT) enabled to measure noninvasively two dimensional airway area more accurately and reliably. METHOD: To investigate airway area responses to bronchial provocation with methacholine and evaluate the major sites of bronchial constriction in patients with bronchial asthma. We examined HRCT scans in five patients with bronchial asthma who had significant bronchoconstriction(20% or more decrease in FEV1) using CT scanner(5,000T CT, Shimadzu Co, Japan) before and in 3~5 min. after methacholine inhalation. Airways which were matched by parenchymal anatomic landmarks in each patient before and after methacholine inhalation were measured using film scanner(TZ-3X scanner; Truvel Co. Chatsworth CA, USA) and a semiautomated region growing method. RESULTS: 1) We identified 9 to 12 airways in each patient which were matched by parenchymal anatomic landmarks before and after methacholine inhalation. 2) Airway responses to methacholine are quite different even in a patient. 3) The constriction of small airways(average diameter <2 mm; area <3.14mm2) was 48.7% (8.3; SEM, n=43), being more prominant than that of large airways(average diameter >2 mm; area >3.14 mm2), 53.8% (4.4;SEM, n=10), but not significantly different(p>0.05). 4) There was no significant difference in the degree of constriction between upper(44.3% +5.8; mean + SEM, n=30) and lower lung regions(56.7% +4.5, n=23). CONCLUSIONS: Thus airway responses to methacholine bronchoprovocation is quite variable in a patient with bronchial asthma and has no typical pattern in patients with bronchial asthma.
