Journal Article Ahead of print
PubMed: 41467941 DOI: 10.1177/19433654251405269
Effects of Five Body Positions on the Regional Ventilation Distribution Assessed Using Electrical Impedance Tomography.
Respir Care
Authors: Natalia Morales Mestre, Guillaume Maerckx, Xavier Wittebole, Virginie Montiel, Gregory Reychler
Affiliations
- Dr. Morales Mestre, Dr. Reychler, and Mr. Maerckx are affiliated with Secteur de Kinésithérapie et Ergothérapie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.
- Dr. Morales Mestre, Mr. Maerckx, Prof. Wittebole, and Prof. Montiel are affiliated with Critical Care Department, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catolique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
- Dr. Morales Mestre and Dr. Reychler are affiliated with Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique (IREC), Pôle de Pneumologie, ORL & Dermatologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
- Dr. Reychler is affiliated with Pneumology Department, St-Luc University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
Background: Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) is a noninvasive method for visualization and quantification of regional ventilation. The objective of this study was to assess regional variations in ventilation across different positions in healthy subjects. Methods: Regional differences in ventilation were compared between the right and left lateral decubitus positions, as well as between the supine, semi-sitting, and prone positions. EIT was performed using a PulmoVista 500 (Dräger Medical, Lübeck, Germany). Results: During lateral decubitus, ventilation significantly increased in the dependent lung. In the right lung, ventilation was 42.5 ± 11.4% in the left lateral decubitus compared with 65.2 ± 12.8% in the right lateral decubitus (P < .001). In the left lung, ventilation was 56.6 ± 11.6% in left lateral decubitus versus 34.4 ± 13.0% in right lateral decubitus (P < .001). These changes were mainly observed in the ventral dependent quadrants. In the supine, semi-sitting, and prone positions, no global differences in ventilation distribution were observed. However, ventilation slightly increased in the left ventral quadrant (supine < prone, P = .03) and decreased in the right dorsal quadrant (supine > prone, P = .03). These subtle variations likely reflect the physiological characteristics of healthy individuals. Conclusions: EIT demonstrated a clear redistribution of ventilation toward the dependent lung in lateral decubitus positions. In contrast, only minimal regional ventilation changes were observed among supine, semi-sitting, and prone positions in healthy subjects. These findings support the utility of EIT in assessing position-related ventilation shifts and underscore the need for further research in patients with impaired pulmonary function.
MeSH
Lung, Tomography, Critical Care, Healthy Volunteers, Supine Position, Ventilation, Physical Therapy Modalities, Prone Position