AJP - Lung AJP: Endocrinology and Metabolism
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 294: L1023-L1031, 2008. First published March 21, 2008; doi:10.1152/ajplung.00533.2007
1040-0605/08 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Figure
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
294/6/L1023    most recent
00533.2007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Effros, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Casaburi, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Effros, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Casaburi, R.

INVITED REVIEW

Indicator dilution measurements of extravascular lung water: basic assumptions and observations

Richard M. Effros, Prapaporn Pornsuriyasak, Janos Porszasz, and Richard Casaburi

Los Angeles Biomedical Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California


    ABSTRACT
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 REFERENCES
 
Since they were introduced more than five decades ago, a variety of single-pass indicator, thermal, and osmotic dilution approaches have been developed for detecting and measuring excess fluid in the lungs. This brief review discusses why studies of the extravascular lung water (EVLW) continue to intrigue physiologists and clinicians and the likelihood that they will become sufficiently reliable for more widespread use. Emphasis is placed on the basic assumptions that underlie these measurements and limitations imposed by the nature of the data that are collected. A distinction is made between approaches that are based on compartmental models of solute and water exchange and those that represent extensions of more conventional washout procedures, which have been utilized extensively for measurements of gas volumes in the lungs. Although the compartmental approach has been used to simplify indicator dilution studies by eliminating the need for a vascular indicator, it is based on assumptions that may not be realistic. Early recirculation inevitably limits the period in which observations can be made and impairs detection of those portions of the lungs with decreased perfusion. These general principles are also used to develop a new method of analyzing osmotic transient studies. A short account is given of EVLW observations that have been made in animals and humans. Both the sensitivity and specificity of EVLW measurements in humans are uncertain, and the normal clinical range of EVLW remains in doubt.

acute lung injury; adult respiratory distress syndrome; pulmonary edema; dye dilution techniques


THE PERENNIAL QUEST to find a practical and reliable method for detecting and measuring excess water in the lungs of patients with transudative and/or exudative pulmonary edema has recently grown more urgent because of concerns regarding the safety of pulmonary artery catheterization in critically ill patients (8, 56). Although measurements of pulmonary artery occlusion pressures do not provide a direct measurement of the amount of fluid in the lungs, they can indicate the presence of elevated left atrial pressures, which tend to promote edema formation. Nor have conventional measurements of gas exchange or pulmonary mechanics proven either specific or sensitive for following the progress of lung injury in patients with pulmonary edema due to diffuse lung damage. Routine chest X-rays can be useful but do not provide quantitative information. In theory, advanced imaging approaches could provide valuable information, but these are difficult to use in an intensive care environment.

It is therefore not surprising that efforts have been made to resuscitate and perfect older techniques that were designed for bedside measurements of extravascular lung water (EVLW), including single-pass indicator dilution procedures (33, 50, 78). Most of these approaches are based on simultaneous intravenous injections of indicators that rapidly exchange with lung water (e.g., labeled water, ethanol, osmotic transients, or heat) and those that remain in the vasculature (usually labeled plasma proteins and/or red blood cells). Estimates of lung water are made from the manner in which these indicators subsequently emerge in the systemic arterial blood. In more recent studies, a single thermal or osmotic indicator has been used to estimate the EVLW.

Although many studies of EVLW have been reported (see below), controversy persists regarding the reliability and usefulness of these approaches. Justification for these measurements must be based in part on conceptual analysis and consideration of the assumptions that are made.

Early Procedures

Chinard and Enns (14) were the first to use bolus injections of solutions containing a dye bound to serum protein (Evans blue) and labeled water to study exchange between the blood and tissues of canine lungs (Fig. 1). They noted that the emergence of labeled water from the lungs was delayed compared with Evans blue dye. Because initial concentrations of labeled water were lower than those of dye, they concluded that much of the injected tritiated water had left the pulmonary circulation during a single transit through the lungs.


Figure 1
View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the bolus injection, double indicator dilution method of measuring lung water. Whereas the intravascular indicator remains confined to the intrathoracic blood volume (ITBV), the water indicator (e.g., labeled water or thermal impulse) also has access to the extravascular lung water (EVLW). The pulmonary outflow curves are shown on the right and the recirculation curves are indicated on the left.

 
Lillienfield et al. (44) and Anthonisen and Crone (3) subsequently used a similar approach to show that the water content of the lungs was increased in patients with congestive heart failure. Following bolus injections into the pulmonary inflow, concentrations of the water indicator (e.g., D2O or alcohol) are initially less than those of the vascular indicator, indicating loss into the tissues (Fig. 1, area A). The subsequent return of the water label into the vasculature is indicated by the later increase in its concentration above those of the vascular indicator (Fig. 1, area B). These investigators assumed that concentrations of the water indicator were the same in the lung tissues and vasculature at the time of the crossover (tequil, indicated by an asterisk). They calculated the net quantity (m) of the water indicator that had entered the tissue at tequil from the product of the area A and the cardiac output (Q)

Formula 1(1)
where t0 indicates the time at which the intravascular indicator appears in the outflow and cvasc and cwater designate the concentrations of the vascular and water indicators at time t. The EVLW was then calculated from the equation

Formula 2(2)
where cwater,equil designates the concentration of the water indicator at tequil.

This approach makes the unnecessary assumption that concentrations of water indicator in the tissues and blood are the same at tequil. There are a number of reasons for doubting that concentrations of any label ever become uniform throughout the lungs after a transient injection. Because there is considerable variability in the transit times of indicators through the lungs, it can be anticipated that the injected indicators reach the pulmonary vessels at different times and that some of the labeled water may be leaving some of the exchange vessels and returning to others at the very same time. Furthermore, the ratio between the extravascular-to-vascular volumes may differ in various regions of the lungs, thereby altering concentrations of D2O relative to those of the vascular indicator in blood emerging from these areas. Instantaneous equilibration of labeled water throughout the lung tissues would result in the emergence of this indicator before the vascular indicator, which must be delivered to the pulmonary veins by convection within vessels rather than diffusion across cell membranes. Since this has never been seen, this model of exchange has been abandoned, although a comparable analysis has been revived in recent osmotic studies (see below).

Steady-State Infusions and the Mean Transit Time Approach

Equilibration of indicator concentrations between the blood and tissues can only be expected when the indicators are infused at a constant rate over a sufficiently long interval. Under these circumstances, outflow concentrations of the indicators reach maximal values that equal those in the inflow and the compartmental volume. This approach is analogous to the conventional nitrogen washout approach used to measure the volume of gas in the lungs at the functional residual capacity. Because they are analogous, it is useful to compare the similarities and differences in these procedures.

In nitrogen washout studies, patients inhale pure oxygen from functional residual capacity, and measurements are made of the total volume of nitrogen (VN2) recovered in the exhaled air over a period of 7 min or more. This approach is very "robust" since it only assumes that nitrogen represents ~80% of the gas in all portions of the lungs before washout and that all of the nitrogen that was in the lungs is recovered. The amount of gas in unventilated regions consequently remains unmeasured. The rate of washout and the relative roles of diffusion and convection can vary during washout. Even the lung volume can change during washout since the volume calculated represents the volume at the beginning of the washout procedure. The volume of air in the lung (plus the volume in the dead space of the equipment) at the start of washout is calculated as VN2/0.8.

In an analogous fashion, all of the unlabeled blood in isolated lungs could be flushed out of the lungs by pumping saline or "labeled" blood into the pulmonary artery and collecting the entire pulmonary venous outflow. Under these circumstances, the intrathoracic blood volume (ITBV) would be measured (Fig. 1). It is assumed that all of the unlabeled blood is collected, but the rate at which the lung is perfused with the new fluid does not have to be constant. Nor is it assumed that the volume of the pulmonary vascular volume remains constant. However, it is assumed that there is no recirculation of the fluid used to perfuse the lungs during the period of the study. The volume of unlabeled blood recovered indicates the pulmonary vascular volume when the infusion began. A similar method could be used to replace unlabeled water in the central blood volume and lung tissues by perfusing the lungs with an appropriate water indicator.

Rather than replacing the entire cardiac output with vascular and water indicators (for example, indocyanine green and labeled water), these indicators are usually injected as a bolus into a systemic vein, and concentrations are monitored in the arterial blood (Fig. 1). It is assumed that the cardiac output and the vascular and water content remains constant during the study and that the indicator bolus becomes well mixed with the inflow. It is also assumed that the distribution of transit times of the indicators remains unchanged between the sites of injection and collection and that this function is not influenced by the concentration of indicators.

Although labeled water was originally used as the water indicator, this was subsequently replaced with a thermal signal, which avoids isotopic exposure and is readily measured in the pulmonary outflow. In a typical study, a 20-ml bolus of a cold (4°C) isotonic solution (0.9% NaCl) containing a dye (indocyanine green) is rapidly injected into a central venous catheter, and concentrations of the dye and the temperature of blood in a peripheral artery or aorta are measured and plotted against time (63). An advantage of a thermal signal is that it is ~100 times more diffusible than labeled water in aqueous solutions and can presumably reach some poorly perfused regions of the lung. As reviewed by Lewis et al. (43), early studies showed that the thermal signal reached a distribution volume that approached the weight of water in the lungs, whereas the volume of distribution calculated for labeled water was generally between 50 and 70% of the water content of the lungs.

Both the vascular and extravascular volumes of the lungs can be calculated from the products of the cardiac output and the mean transit times (Formula 2) of the vascular and extravascular indicators.

Formula 3(3)

Formula 4(4)

Formula 5(5)

Where ITBV is the intrathoracic blood, ITTV is the intrathoracic thermal volume. (See Supplemental data for this article, available online at the AJP-Lung web site, and Refs. 49, 42, and 80 for derivation of these equations and calculation of Formula 5). It should be emphasized that these equations do not assume any model of indicator transport, which can include a complex mixture of diffusional and convective processes. This analysis can be extended to indicators that are distributed heterogeneously between organ compartments, and this approach has been used to determine tissue pH (16).

Meier and Zierler's analysis (49) of mean transit times following bolus injections was originally applied to intravascular compartments, in which it was assumed that the intravascular indicator labeled convectional movements of fluid in the blood. Extension of this approach to indicators that diffuse into extravascular compartments was accomplished more than a decade later, when it was used to estimate both lung compartmental volumes and the concentrations of extravascular and intracellular indicators that would prevail during constant infusions (13, 16). Although various "labels" are used in these studies, they need not behave in the same manner as any unlabeled constituents already present in the blood.

Osmotic Volume of Distribution

Injections of hypertonic solutions have also been used as an alternative indicator for estimating the EVLW volume. The effect of these solutions to dehydrate the lungs has been monitored in the pulmonary outflow by either measuring 1) the dilution of intravascular indicators (19), 2) the gravimetric density of this blood (35, 37), or 3) the velocity of sound through the blood (24, 45). We originally injected small volumes of hypertonic saline, sucrose, or urea into the jugular veins of anesthetized dogs and collected serial samples of blood from the carotid artery (18, 19). Extraction of water from the pulmonary parenchyma was followed by monitoring dilution of blood emerging from the lungs. By measuring concentrations of hemoglobin, plasma protein, osmolality, labeled red cells, and plasma, Na+, and Cl, it was possible to show that bolus injections of hypertonic solutions result in the extraction of water from the lungs that was relatively free of electrolytes and other small solutes. This observation was consistent with the assumption that these hypertonic solutions rapidly dehydrate the cellular compartments of the lung, which allow rapid flow of water across cell membranes but resist the movement of electrolytes and other lipophobic solutes. It has subsequently been shown that much of the water that crosses cell membranes passes through aquaporin channels (1, 11, 17, 38).

In a recent clinical study, estimates of lung water were made using injections of hypertonic saline (5 g/dl) in patients undergoing dialysis (45). The venous and arterial catheters provided convenient access for injections and analysis of arterial blood. Since fluid overload with pulmonary edema is a frequent consequence of renal insufficiency, this is an important group to study. Rather than directly measuring concentrations in the pulmonary outflow (i.e., the arterial blood), the investigators monitored the velocity of sound through the catheters, which decreases when protein and red blood cell concentrations fall. The expected effects of such injections on serum osmolality and protein concentrations are shown in Fig. 2. Sequential injections are made of isotonic and hypertonic saline. It is assumed that the passage of the hypertonic bolus through the pulmonary circulation remains about the same as that of the isotonic bolus and that the osmolality of the blood emerging in the arterial catheter following the hypertonic injection can be calculated from the isotonic curve. As indicated in Fig. 2, the movement of hypertonic saline though the circulation results in a flow of water from the tissue to the blood and a corresponding fall in the velocity of sound in the blood entering the arterial catheter. This is presumably associated with contraction of the extravascular volume with an increase in the osmolality of the pulmonary tissues. Once the hypertonic solution has left the pulmonary circulation, water returns to the hypertonic tissues, resulting in an increase in blood protein concentrations and sound velocity. The osmolality of the tissues fall and the EVLW is restored to its original volume.


Figure 2
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 2. Hypertonic saline studies. Injections of small volumes of hypertonic saline into the pulmonary inflow result in movement of water from the lung tissue into the blood, resulting in dilution of the protein concentration. After the hypertonic saline has traversed the vasculature, water returns to the pulmonary tissue, resulting in an increase in protein concentrations and return of lung volume to its initial size. Integration of the osmotic and protein curves provides a measure of the amount of water that would be removed during a constant infusion of hypertonic saline.

 
As in early studies of labeled water exchange (3, 44), the authors have inappropriately assumed that equilibration of the osmotic transient occurred at some time during the transient study. Equilibration of osmolality in the lungs can only be expected during constant infusions. In theory, the response of the osmotic and protein concentrations emerging from the lungs during a constant hypertonic infusion can be calculated from the transient injections by integrating both the protein (sound velocity) and osmotic pressure curves (estimated from the isoosmotic injections). This could be readily accomplished by summing successive points along the putative osmotic and protein curves derived from successive injections of isotonic and hypertonic saline.

The maximal osmolality (cosm,max) that the blood would reach after a constant infusion of hypertonic saline can be calculated by integrating the osmolalities observed following a bolus injection

Formula 6(6)
where cosm,0 is the osmolality of the blood before the hypertonic saline injection and cosm,t is the osmolality at time t. As indicated above, cosm,t is estimated from the response to an initial injection of isotonic saline but would be better estimated by including an intravascular dye such as indocyanine green in the injections solution and measuring dye concentrations as well as those of protein in the blood emerging from the lungs.

After a prolonged infusion of the hypertonic saline, the amount of fluid removed from the lung ({Delta}EVLW) can be calculated by integrating the fall in serum protein concentrations observed after a bolus injection

Formula 7(7)
where cprot,0 indicates the baseline protein concentration and cprot,t designates the protein concentration at time t. For the sake of simplicity, the cardiac output is assumed approximately constant.

If the total quantity of osmoles in the EVLW remains constant, then:

Formula 7

Formula 8(8)
Although integration of osmotic bolus studies to estimate lung water has not been reported, constant infusions of hypertonic solutions have been used to estimate the total amount of water in the lungs in isolated dog lungs suspended from a weight transducer (66). Only half of the lung water was detected. This discrepancy can be attributed to heterogeneous perfusion of the lungs and to the likelihood that the reflection coefficients of the tissue membranes to sodium chloride are less than 1.0. A low reflection coefficient would indicate that sodium chloride leaks into the tissues, thereby reducing its osmotic efficiency. There is evidence that hypertonic injections selectively dehydrate the parenchymal cells rather than the pulmonary interstitium (19, 88). Estimates of lung water using osmotic challenges may exclude the extracellular fluid in the interstitial and alveolar compartments from estimates of the EVLW. Since accumulation of fluid in the interstitium and alveolar compartments is more likely to interfere with gas exchange in the lungs than cellular edema, this could diminish the usefulness of osmotic measurements of EVLW.

Other problems with the osmotic bolus approach should also be kept in mind. Injections of hypertonic solutions (including radioopaque dyes) are associated with transient hypotension and reduced lung perfusion related in part to decreases in deformability of red blood cells (18, 71). Since injections of hypertonic saline are associated with transient changes in blood flow and the hematocrit of blood emerging from the lungs, the assumption that the outflow patterns of isotonic and hypertonic saline remain the same may therefore be unjustified.

Intrinsic Limitations of Indicator Dilution Measurements of Lung Water

The most serious problem associated with any indicator dilution measurements of compartmental volumes is the potential failure of the injected indicators to reach all portions of the organ during the observation period. Since heat diffuses more rapidly than labeled water, it was hoped that thermal signals would reach more remote areas of the lungs. However, it can be calculated that the mean transit time of the thermal signal with a sphere 1 cm in diameter would be nearly 39 s, which is about twice the time at which recirculation of indicators occurs (20). Furthermore, heat can exchange with adjacent tissues such as the walls of the heart and vessels, the pleura, and even the gas phase in the air spaces and nonaqueous tissue constituents. Evidence for equilibration with the cardiac walls has been described (61), although this was not always detected in another report (9).

A second and related problem of indicator dilution measurements of vascular and water volumes in the lungs is the method used to correct for recirculation of indicators. Following injection into a systemic vein, recirculating indicators can be detected in the systemic arterial blood within 20–30 s in resting subjects (20) and sooner when cardiac output increases. To remove recirculation from the indicator dilution curves, it is generally assumed that the concentrations of these indicators fall monoexponentially. These extrapolations are usually graphed on semilogarithmic coordinates, and the downslopes are calculated between the times when concentrations have fallen from 85 to 45% of peak values (33). Justification for this procedure is based on the assumption that the central vascular and total lung water volumes can be modeled as single compartments that empty monoexponentially. There is, however, relatively little evidence for this premise. If lung perfusion is heterogeneous, multiexponential washout patterns would be expected. It is not possible to distinguish between recirculation and a multiexponential outflow pattern on the basis of the indicator dilution curves.

Even in normal lungs, pulmonary vascular perfusion is distinctly heterogeneous, in part because of gravitational forces, and perfusion is influenced by position and cardiac output (89). Increased perfusion of the upper lobes probably plays an important role in the observation that estimated values of lung water increase in normal animals and humans with exercise (27, 29, 30). Pulmonary perfusion becomes further disturbed in patients with lung disease: pulmonary emboli were evident in 20 of 21 patients with ARDS, and fibrocellular intimal obliteration of arteries and veins is common in those surviving beyond 10 days (26, 84). Other factors that can reduce perfusion to injured areas of the lungs include pneumonia, pleural effusions, atelectasis, reduced cardiac output due to shock, increased bronchial artery flow, and increased airway pressures related to the mode of ventilation (7, 15, 26, 68, 69). A variety of studies have shown that acute obstruction of the pulmonary vasculature with PEEP, emboli, and vascular occlusion is usually associated with a reduction in the measured EVLW (2, 4, 76, 85).

It should be noted that if one area of the lung is poorly perfused, the error in calculating the lung water volume can be considerable, even though the calculation of cardiac output is only slightly affected. An extreme but not improbable example is instructive: if 95% of the cardiac output goes to half of the total lung tissue, and 5% perfuses the remainder, the error in calculating the cardiac output will be only 5%, but the error regarding the total extravascular water volume will be 50%. Indicators in blood leaving the underperfused lung would tend to arrive late, after recirculation has occurred and would not be accounted for by the assumption of a monoexponential downslope. Much information regarding regions of the lung with slower perfusion is presumably lost by the arbitrary practice of deleting data after indicator concentrations fall to 45% of peak values.

It is particularly instructive to compare the efficiency with which nitrogen is washed from the air spaces in measurements of functional residual capacity with that of flushing unlabeled water from the lungs. Patients inhale 100% oxygen for 7 min or longer to ensure that nitrogen concentrations have fallen to <2% before collection of the exhaled gas is terminated. The pattern of nitrogen washout is not monoexponential and may be very complex in patients with lung disease. In contrast, concentrations of the thermal water label remain at ~45% peak levels when recirculation occurs, and the subsequent washout of this signal remains undefined, and the assumption of a monoexponential decline remains unproven.

A correction can in theory be made for recirculation if blood is sampled at a site proximal to the site of injection (Fig. 1) or in the pulmonary artery. Using this approach, evidence has been obtained that the outflow curves of neither vascular nor thermal indicators are monoexponential (7, 47). These "deconvolution" procedures are probably too difficult for routine measurements, and measurements of lung water will always be difficult because the EVLW normally represents only ~30% of the total amount of water between the sites of indicator injection and collection after labeled water injections (16), although perhaps somewhat more after thermal injections.

Single Indicator Dilution Studies of Lung Water

To facilitate indicator dilution measurements of EVLW, recent studies have been conducted using only the thermal transients without intravascular indicators. These studies are based on a very early theoretical approach of Newman et al. (58), who developed a monoexponential compartmental model to calculate the volume of the pulmonary vasculature.

The simplest compartmental model (Fig. 3) is a single, well-mixed chamber with a volume, V, in which mixing is instantaneous, and concentrations, c, of an indicator, M, are uniform throughout the chamber. M is delivered to the chamber in the blood flow at one inflow site (e.g., the pulmonary artery) and leaves at an outflow site (e.g., the aorta). If the concentration of m entering the compartment in the inflow blood is 0 and that in the outflow is c, then

Formula 9(9)
where m designates the quantity of M remaining in the exchange volume.


Figure 3
View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 3. Calculation of indicator mean transit times and distribution volumes using 1) the downslope, single monoexponential, well-mixed compartmental model (top and 1st equation) and 2) the noncompartmental, "washout" approach (2nd equation). Subscript "X" indicates the indicator (intravascular or thermal). The compartmental mean transit times are calculated from circular points on the downslopes of the vascular curves plotted on semilogarithmic coordinates, whereas washout mean transit times are calculated from the entire curve, including extrapolated values. Note that points along the same downslope are used to calculate downslope volumes as those used in extrapolating conventional, "noncompartmental" washout curves (square points).

 
Since concentrations of M are assumed to be uniform,

Formula 10(10)

Formula 11(11)

Solution of equation (12) yields

Formula 12(12)
where k is the rate constant, c is the outflow concentration at time t, and co is the initial outflow concentration. Since V/Formula 12 = Formula 12 (see above and Fig. 3), Formula 12 can be readily derived from the inverse of the downslope (k) of the indicator outflow curve plotted on semilogarithmic coordinates (Fig. 3). (This relationship can also be shown by substituting Eq. 13 into the mean transit time equation, see Supplement.) The value of Formula 12 is governed by the ratio of the volume of distribution (e.g., the volume of water in the vascular space for an intravascular dye or the volume of water in the vascular plus the lung water space for the thermal transient) to the blood flow.

Newman et al. (58) assumed that following injection through a central venous catheter, the vascular indicator traverses a series of three well-mixed compartments: the right side of the heart, the pulmonary vasculature, and the left side of the heart and arteries up to the point of collection in a peripheral artery or aorta. They also assumed that the pulmonary blood volume (PBV; see Fig. 4) represents by far the largest of these compartments and is primarily responsible for determining the downslope in the outflow curve.


Figure 4
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 4. Comparison between compartmental volumes measured by indicator dilution methods. ITTV, intrathoracic thermal volume; PBV, pulmonary blood volume; PTV, pulmonary thermal volume; GEDV, global-end diastolic volume. ITBV and ITTV are derived from conventional, noncompartmental washout calculations from the dye and thermal curves. PBV and PTV are calculated from the downslopes of these same curves. EVLW and GEDV are derived as indicated. SV, systemic veins; RA, right atrium; RV, right ventricle; PA, pulmonary arteries; PC, pulmonary capillaries; PV, pulmonary veins; LA, left atrium; LV, left ventricle; Ao, aorta.

 
This compartmental analysis of the manner in which vascular indicators are washed out of the lungs has been criticized on several important grounds (31, 87). There is little reason to believe that 1) the pulmonary vascular compartment represents most of the intrathoracic vascular volume, particularly when there is distention of the cardiac chambers, or that 2) it empties as a single well-mixed compartment. Using Newman's published data, Grodins (31) calculated that the volume of blood between the pulmonary veins and the carotid artery averaged 60% of the volume between the right atrium and carotid artery, arguing against the assumption that the pulmonary vasculature is the largest compartment. Although the Newman approach is based on an analysis of series compartments, it does not consider the possibility of parallel compartments, which are associated with multiexponential washout patterns.

These considerations, as well as the development of the mean transit time approach, led to the general abandonment of the Newman technique for nearly five decades. However, in a recent reincarnation of the Newman model, the downslope of the thermal rather than the intravascular indicator curve is used to calculate what is referred to as a pulmonary thermal volume PTV (33, 40, 73, 75). It is assumed that the PTV comprises the intravascular volume plus the exchangeable water volume of the lungs (Fig. 4). In contrast, the total intrathoracic thermal volume (ITTV) is determined from the product of Formula 12 and the mean transit time of the thermal signal (Fig. 4). The difference ITTV-PTV purportedly represents all of the blood in the central circulation except for the pulmonary vascular volume and is referred to as the "global-end diastolic (blood) volume," GEDV (Fig. 4).

Sakka et al. (75) compared the GEDV with the entire vascular volume (ITBV) calculated from the product of Q and the mean transit time of indocyanine green. They found that

Formula 13(13)
in a study of more than 200 critically ill patients. However, it is usually assumed that

Formula 14(14)

Sakka et al. postulated that the ITBV exceeded the GEDV because the former includes the PBV, whereas the latter does not

Formula 15(15)

Equation 15 indicates that the PBV constitutes only 20% of the total ITBV. This is contrary to the key assumption of Newman et al. (58) that the pulmonary vasculature represents the predominant mixing volume in the central circulation. It also seems very unlikely that this presumed anatomical relationship between the vascular volume within the lungs (GEDV) and the total central blood volume remains nearly the same in their entire population. Independent differences in pulmonary vascular and/or cardiac chamber volumes would be expected in patients in an intensive care environment. Since the stroke output from the right heart distends the pulmonary vasculature during systole, it is difficult to tell how much of the downslope of the thermal curve is determined by mixing in the PTV rather than the heart. Nor is it obvious how much of the larger pulmonary vessels contribute to mixing in the PTV. In view of uncertainty regarding the portions of the pulmonary circulation and lung tissue that effectively contribute to the PTV, the assumption that the PBV, PTV, and GEDV values represent what their names imply must also remain in doubt.

It has also been suggested that an increase in the ratio between GEDV and ITTV can be used to distinguish patients with congestive failure from those with noncardiac pulmonary edema (55). Aside from uncertainty concerning the interpretation of GEDV, this hypothesis ignores the fact that many patients with congestive heart failure have diastolic dysfunction with normal intracardiac blood volumes.

Two points (circles in Fig. 3) are used to draw the downslopes of each indicator for calculation of Formula 15downslope = F/Vdownslope in the monoexponential models. Similarly, two points (squares in Fig. 3) must be selected for extrapolation of the indicator dilution curves beyond the time that recirculation appears in the washout (noncompartmental) calculation of Formula 15washout = F/Vwashout. These frequently use the same exponential downslope (55). Under these circumstances, the only difference between the two curves is the upslope, which is incorporated in the Formula 15washout calculation but is excluded in the Formula 15downslope model. Because the upslope values of the curves are less than those of the downslope during the upslope interval, the overall curve is flatter, yielding a value for Formula 15washout that is greater than that calculated for Formula 15downslope. The upslope values presumably reflect the heterogeneous manner in which the indicators traverse the pulmonary circulation.

At best, thermal indicator estimates of vascular volumes can only be considered convenient approximations for the intravascular volume that presumably would be more accurately calculated with an intravascular dye, such as indocyanine green.

Experience With Indicator Dilution Measurements of Lung Water

Despite these conceptual reservations concerning indicator dilution measurements of lung water, evidence has been reported suggesting that they may prove useful in the management of patients with various forms of pulmonary edema (see excellent reviews of Isakow and Schuster and Michard) (33, 50). Increases in EVLW have been described in cardiogenic pulmonary edema and ALI/ARDS, and EVLW appeared to fall with clinical improvement in many of these studies (5, 21, 22, 23, 30, 39, 41, 46, 48, 50, 53, 54, 55, 59, 67, 73, 77, 81, 83). A correlation between EVLW was seen with X-rays and CT examinations in some studies (46, 64, 83). A reduction in EVLW was seen in response to systemic β-agonists (65), and EVLW seemed to be useful in planning fluid administration (2, 54).

Although the approach retains much of its popularity, reports have appeared that question the reliability of EVLW measurements. EVLW tends to exceed gravimetric measurements when a thermal signal is used, especially when no vascular indicator is used (21, 36, 52, 57, 73, 75, 79). In one study, the volume of distribution of the thermal indicator averaged 76% more than that measured gravimetically (86). Of particular concern was the observation that EVLW was in the normal range in 35% of patients with clinical ARDS/ALI (51). Nor were EVLW studies found useful in patients with burns (40), and calculated EVLW failed to increase in some forms of experimental edema (10, 34, 72). These observations suggest that measurement of EVLW may not be sensitive. Furthermore, there appears to be very little data available concerning the range of values EVLW determined with thermal injections in normal human subjects or patients with other disorders. Thus the specificity of EVLW measurements is also in doubt. It is generally accepted that the EVLW is normally below 7 ml/kg in humans, but this value appears to be based on limited data collected in animals (43), which might not be applicable to human studies. A recent study suggests that EVLW measurements should be indexed with ideal rather than observed body weight (64).

The Clinical Role of Indicator Dilution Studies of Lung Water

Although the introduction of procedures that can measure EVLW could be of some importance in patients with excess lung water, EVLW data can be very misleading (12, 20, 33, 82). A decrease in EVLW among individuals or groups of patients could either represent clinical improvement related to reabsorption of lung water or deterioration due to reduced perfusion of the pulmonary vasculature that might not be obvious from changes in vascular volumes. Equivocal data of this nature could put patients at some risk.

Validation of indicator dilution approaches must ultimately be based in part on comparison with gravimetric measurements, which can only be obtained in animal models or postmortem lungs. Although generally considered to be a "gold standard," wet/dry ratios were originally used to detect transudative edema fluid, which contains relatively low protein concentrations and therefore has a high wet/dry ratio. Exudative fluid contains higher protein concentrations, and even inflammatory cells, which have less of an effect on the wet/dry weight ratio as transudates. In contrast, exudates should increase the measured volume of the EVLW nearly as much as transudates.

Reported correlations between gravimetric and indicator measurements in EVLW may partially reflect the fact that measurements of flow are much more accurate than those of mean transit time (see above). Since cardiac output is greater in larger subjects, the apparent agreement in these parameters can be related to differences in flow rather than EVLW. These studies should report whether there is any correlation of gravimetric measurements with mean transit time differences of the water and vascular indicators.

It can also be argued that it would be more useful to measure the extracellular volumes of the lung than the entire water volume, since fluid accumulation in the interstitial and alveolar compartments would be more likely to interfere with gas exchange than changes in the cellular compartment. Unfortunately, relatively little of conventional extracellular indicators (e.g., salts and sugars) diffuse out of the pulmonary vasculature during a single circulation. In any case, measurements of endothelial and/or epithelial permeability would provide more direct evidence for lung injury than any measurement of compartmental volumes.

From a clinical point of view, the sites of fluid accumulation may be as important as the volume of water that has entered the lungs. Characteristically, early fluid accumulation is restricted to the interstitial compartment. This generally has a relatively modest effect on gas exchange. In contrast, alveolar and airway flooding can rapidly lead to asphyxiation. Only radiologic approaches can make this distinction (25, 27). Furthermore, radiologic procedures can detect lung water in regions that are poorly perfused or ventilated. Whether advanced imaging techniques can be adapted to an intensive care environment remains uncertain.


    FOOTNOTES
 

Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: Richard M. Effros, Los Angeles Biomedical Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, 1124 West Carson St., Torrance, CA 90502 (e-mail: reffros{at}labiomed.org)


    REFERENCES
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Agre P, Preston GM, Smith BL, Jung JS, Raina S, Monon C, Guggino WB, Nielsen S. Aquaporin CHIP: the archetypal molecular water channel. Am J Physiol Renal Fluid Electrolyte Physiol 265: F463–F476, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Allison RC, Parker JC, Duncan CE, Taylor AE. Effect of air embolism on the measurement of extravascular lung thermal volume. J Appl Physiol 54: 943–949, 1983.[Web of Science][Medline]
  3. Anthonisen P, Crone C. Transcapillary migration of ethyl alcohol in the pulmonary circulation; a method for determining the water content of the lungs in vivo. Acta Physiol Scand 37: 370–379, 1956.[Web of Science][Medline]
  4. Beckett RC, Gray BA. Effect of atelectasis and embolization on extravascular thermal volume of the lung. J Appl Physiol 53: 1614–1619, 1982.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Bindels AJ, van der Hoeven JG, Meinders AE. Pulmonary artery wedge pressure and extravascular lung water in patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema requiring mechanical ventilation. Am J Cardiol 84: 1158–1163, 1999.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Blomqvist H, Wickerts CJ, Rosblad PG. Effects of pleural fluid and positive end-expiratory pressure on the measurement of extravascular lung water by the double-indicator dilution technique. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 35: 578–583, 1991.[Web of Science][Medline]
  7. Bock J, Deuflhard P, Hoeft A, Korb H, Wolpers HG, Steinmann J, Hellige G. Thermal recovery after passage of the pulmonary circulation assessed by deconvolution. J Appl Physiol 64: 1210–1216, 1988.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Calfee CS, Matthay MA. Nonventilatory treatments for acute lung injury and ARDS. Chest 13: 913–920, 2007.
  9. Carlile PV, Beckett RC, Gray BA. Relationship between CO and transit times for dye and thermal indicators in central circulation. J Appl Physiol 60: 1363–1372, 1986.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Carlile PV, Lowery DD, Gray BA. Effect of PEEP and type of injury on thermal-dye estimation of pulmonary edema. J Appl Physiol 60: 22–31, 1986.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Carter EP, Matthay MA, Farinas J, Verkman AS. Transalveolar osmotic and diffusional water permeability in intact mouse lung measured by a novel surface fluorescence method. J Gen Physiol 108: 133–142, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Casaburi R, Wasserman K, Effros RM. Measurement and detection of pulmonary edema. In: Lung Water and Solute Exchange, vol. 7, Lung Biology in Health and Disease, edited by Staub N, Lenfant C. New York: Dekker, 1978, p. 323–365.
  13. Chinard FP, Effros RM, Perl W, Silverman M. Organ vascular and extravascular compartments in vivo. In: Compartment, Pools and Space in Medical Physiology, edited by Bergner P-E E, Lushbaugh CC. Oak Ridge Associated Universities, AEC Symposium No. 11, Oak Ridge, TN, October 24–27, 1966; published 381–422, 1967.
  14. Chinard FP, Enns T. Transcapillary pulmonary exchange of water in the dog. Am J Physiol 178: 197–202, 1954.[Free Full Text]
  15. Dantzker DR, Brook CJ, Dehart P, Lynch JP, Weg JG. Ventilation-perfusion distributions in the adult respiratory distress syndrome. Am Rev Respir Dis 120: 1039–1052, 1979.[Web of Science][Medline]
  16. Effros RM, Chinard FP. The in vivo pH of the extravascular space of the lung. J Clin Invest 48: 1983–1996, 1969.[Web of Science][Medline]
  17. Effros RM, Darin C, Jacobs ER, Rogers RA, Krenz G, Schneeberger EE. Water transport and the distribution of aquaporin-1 in pulmonary air spaces. J Appl Physiol 83: 1002–1016, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Effros RM. Impairment of red cell transit through the canine lungs following injections of hypertonic fluids. Circ Res 31: 590–601, 1972.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Effros RM. Osmotic extraction of hypotonic fluid from the lungs. J Clin Invest 54: 935–947, 1974.[Web of Science][Medline]
  20. Effros RM. Lung water measurements with the mean transit time approach. J Appl Physiol 59: 673–683, 1985.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Eisenberg PR, Hansbrough JR, Anderson D, Schuster DP. A prospective study of lung water measurements during patient management in an intensive care unit. Am Rev Respir Dis 136: 662–668, 1987.[Web of Science][Medline]
  22. Frostell C, Blomqvist H, Wickerts CJ, Hedenstierna G. Lung fluid balance evaluated by the rate of change of extravascular lung water content. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 34: 362–369, 1990.[Web of Science][Medline]
  23. Frostell C, Blomqvist H, Wickerts CJ. Effects of PEEP on extravascular lung water and central blood volume in the dog. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 31: 711–716, 1987.[Web of Science][Medline]
  24. Garland JS, Kianfar C, Nesrallah G, Heidenheim P, Lindsay RM. Measurement of extravascular lung water in hemodialysis patients using blood ultrasound velocity and optical density dilution. ASAIO J 48: 398–403, 2002.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  25. Gattinoni L, Caironi P, Valenza F, Carlesso E. The role of CT-scan studies for the diagnosis and therapy of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Clin Chest Med 27: 559–570, 2006.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  26. Gerdeaux M, Lemaire F, Matamis D, Lampron N, Teisseire B, Becker J, Harf A. Acute respiratory distress syndrome in the adult. Distribution in the ventilation-perfusion ratio. Presse Med 13: 1315–1318, 1984.[Web of Science][Medline]
  27. Goodman LR. Congestive heart failure and adult respiratory distress syndrome. New insights using computed tomography. Radiol Clin North Am 34: 33–46, 1996.[Web of Science][Medline]
  28. Goresky CA, Cronin RFP, Wangel BE. Indicator dilution measurements of extravascular water in the lungs. J Clin Invest 48: 487–504, 1969.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  29. Goresky CA, Warnica JW, Burgess JH, Nadeau BE. Effect of exercise on dilution estimates of extravascular lung water and on the carbon monoxide diffusing capacity in normal adults. Circ Res 37: 379–389, 1975.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Gray BA, Beckett RC, Allison RC, McCaffree DR, Smith RM, Sivak ED, Carlile PV. Effect of edema and hemodynamic changes on extravascular thermal volume of the lung. J Appl Physiol 56: 878–890, 1984.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Grodins FS. Basic concepts in the determination of vascular volumes by indicator-dilution methods. Circ Res 10: 429–446, 1962.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Hamilton WF, Moore JW, Kinsman JM, Spurling RG. Simultaneous determination of the greater and lesser circulation times of the mean velocity of blood flow through the heart and lungs of the cardiac output and an approximation of the amount of blood actively circulating in the heart and lungs. Am J Physiol 85: 377–378, 1928.
  33. Isakow W, Schuster DP. Extravascular lung water measurements and hemodynamic monitoring in the critically ill: bedside alternatives to the pulmonary artery catheter. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 291: L1118–L1131, 2006.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Kambara K, Jerome EH, Serikov VB, Arakawa M, Staub NC. Reliability of extravascular lung thermal volume measurements by thermal conductivity technique in sheep. J Appl Physiol 73: 1449–1456, 1992.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Karch JM, Lee JS. Pulmonary fluid extraction and osmotic conductance, {sigma}K, measured in vivo. J Appl Physiol 84: 769–781, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Katzenelson R, Perel A, Berkenstadt H, Preisman S, Kogan S, Sternik L, Segal E. Accuracy of transpulmonary thermodilution versus gravimetric measurement of extravascular lung water. Crit Care Med 32: 1550–1554, 2004.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  37. Kenner T, Moser M, Hinghofer-Szalkay H. Determination of cardiac output and of transcapillary fluid exchange by continuous recording of blood density. Basic Res Cardiol 75: 501–509, 1980.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  38. King LS, Nielsen S, Agre P. Aquaporins in complex tissues. I. Developmental patterns in respiratory and glandular tissues of rat. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 273: C1541–C1548, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Kirov MY, Kuzkov VV, Kuklin VN, Waerhaug K, Bjertnaes LJ. Extravascular lung water assessed by transpulmonary single thermodilution and postmortem gravimetry in sheep. Crit Care 8: R451–R458, 2004.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  40. Kuntscher MV, Czermak C, Blome-Eberwein S, Dacho A, Germann G. Transcardiopulmonary thermal dye versus single thermodilution methods for assessment of intrathoracic blood volume and extravascular lung water in major burn resuscitation. J Burn Care Rehabil 24: 142–147, 2003.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  41. Kuzkov VV, Kirov MY, Sovershaev MA, Kuklin VN, Suborov EV, Waerhaug K, Bjertnaes LJ. Extravascular lung water determined with single transpulmonary thermodilution correlates with the severity of sepsis-induced acute lung injury. Crit Care Med 34: 1647–1653, 2006.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  42. Lassen NA, Perl W. Tracer kinetic methods in medical physiology. New York: Raven Press, 1979.
  43. Lewis FR, Elings VB, Hill SL, Christensen JM. The measurement of extravascular lung water by thermal-green dye indicator dilution. Ann NY Acad Sci 384: 394–410, 1982.[Web of Science][Medline]
  44. Lilienfield LS, Freis ED, Partenope EA, Morowitz HJ. Transcapillary migration of heavy water and thiocyanate ion in the pulmonary circulation of normal subjects and patients with congestive heart failure. J Clin Invest 34: 1–8, 1955.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  45. MacRae JM, Joseph G, Kislukhin V, Krivitski NM, Heidenheim AP, Lindsay RM. Determining lung water volume in stable hemodialysis patients. ASAIO J 52: 430–437, 2006.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  46. Martin G, Eaton S, Mealer M, Moss M. Extravascular lung water in patients with severe sepsis: a prospective cohort study. Crit Care 9: R74–R82, 2005.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  47. Maseri A, Caldini P, Permutt S, Zierler KL. Frequency function of transit times through dog pulmonary circulation. Circ Res 26: 527–543, 1970.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. McAuley DF, Giles S, Fichter H, Perkins GD, Gao F. What is the optimal duration of ventilation in the prone position in acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome? Intens Care Medicine 28: 414–418, 2002.[CrossRef]
  49. Meier P, Zierler KL. On the theory of the indicator-dilution method for measurement of blood flow and volume. J Appl Physiol 6: 731–744, 1954.[Web of Science][Medline]
  50. Michard F. Title bedside assessment of extravascular lung water by dilution methods: temptations and pitfalls. Crit Care Med 35: 1186–1192, 2007.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  51. Michard F, Zarka V, Alaya S. Better characterization of acute lung injury/ARDS using lung water. Chest 125: 1166, 2004.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  52. Mihm FG, Feeley TW, Rosenthal MH, Lewis F. Measurement of extravascular lung water in dogs using the thermal-green dye indicator dilution method. Anesthesiol 57: 116–122, 1982.[Web of Science][Medline]
  53. Mihm FG, Feeley TW, Jamieson SW. Thermal dye double indicator dilution measurement of lung water in man: comparison with gravimetric measurements. Thorax 42: 72–76, 1987.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  54. Mitchell JP, Schuller D, Calandrino FS, Schuster DP. Improved outcome based on fluid management in critically ill patients requiring pulmonary artery catheterization. Am Rev Respir Dis 145: 990–998, 1992.[Web of Science][Medline]
  55. Monnet X, Anguel N, Osman D, Hamzaoui O, Richard C, Teboul JL. Assessing pulmonary permeability by transpulmonary thermodilution allows differentiation of hydrostatic pulmonary edema from ALI/ARDS. Intensive Care Med 33: 448–453, 2007.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  56. Network NACT. Pulmonary-artery versus central venous catheter to guide treatment of acute lung injury. N Engl J Med 354: 2213–2224, 2006.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  57. Neumann P. Extravascular lung water and intrathoracic blood volume: double versus single indicator dilution technique. Intensive Care Med 25: 216–219, 1999.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  58. Newman EV, Merrel LM, Genecin A, Monge C, Milnor WR, McKeever WP. The dye dilution method for describing the central circulation. An analysis of factors shaping the time-concentration curves. Circ 4: 735–746, 1951.[Web of Science][Medline]
  59. Nirmalan M, Niranjan M, Willard T, Edwards JD, Little RA, Dark PM. Estimation of errors in determining intrathoracic blood volume using thermal dilution in pigs with acute lung injury and haemorrhage. Br J Anaesth 93: 546–551, 2004.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  60. Nirmalan M, Willard TM, Edwards DJ, Little RA, Dark PM. Estimation of errors in determining intrathoracic blood volume using the single transpulmonary thermal dilution technique in hypovolemic shock. Anesthesiol 103: 805–812, 2005.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  61. Noble WH, Kay JC, Maret KH, Caskanette G. Reappraisal of extravascular lung thermal volume as a measure of pulmonary edema. J Appl Physiol 48: 120–129, 1980.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  62. Noble WH, Kay JC. Effect of cardiac output on extravascular lung water measurements made with the thermoconductivity method. Anesthesiol 65: 206–209, 1986.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  63. Noble WH, Severinghaus JW. Thermal and conductivity dilution curves for rapid quantitation of pulmonary edema. J Appl Physiol 32: 770–775, 1972.[Free Full Text]
  64. Patroniti N, Bellani G, Maggioni E, Manfio A, Marcora B, Pesenti A. Measurement of pulmonary edema in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 33: 2547–2554, 2005.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  65. Perkins GD, McAuley DF, Thickett DR, Gao F. The β-agonist lung injury trial (BALTI): a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 173: 281–287, 2006.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  66. Perl W, Chowdhury P, Chinard FP. Reflection coefficients of dog lung endothelium to small hydrophilic solutes. Am J Physiol 228: 797–809, 1975.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  67. Phillips CR, Chestnut MS, Smith SM. Extravascular lung water in sepsis-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: indexing with predicted body weight improves correlation with severity of illness and survival. Crit Care Med 36: 69–73, 2008.[Web of Science][Medline]
  68. Pingleton SK, Bone RC, Pingleton WW, Ruth WE. Prevention of pulmonary emboli in a respiratory intensive care unit: efficacy of low-dose heparin. Chest 79: 647–650, 1981.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  69. Putensen C, Mutz NJ, Putensen-Himmer G, Zinserling J. Spontaneous breathing during ventilatory support improves ventilation-perfusion distributions in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 159: 1241–1248, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  70. Ralph DD, Robertson HT, Weaver LJ. Distribution of ventilation and perfusion during positive end-expiratory pressure in the adult respiratory distress syndrome. Am Rev Respir Dis 131: 54–60, 1988.
  71. Read RC, Johnson JA, Vick JA, Meyer MW. Vascular effects of hypertonic solutions. Circ Res 8: 538–547, 1960.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  72. Roch A, Michelet P, Lambert D, Delliaux S, Saby C, Perrin G, Ghez O, Bregeon F, Thomas P, Carpentier JP, Papazian L, Auffray JP. Accuracy of the double indicator method for measurement of extravascular lung water depends on the type of acute lung injury. Crit Care Med 32: 811–817, 2004.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  73. Rossi P, Wanecek M, Rudehill A, Konrad D, Weitzberg E, Oldner A. Comparison of a single indicator and gravimetric technique for estimation of extravascular lung water in endotoxemic pigs. Crit Care Med 34: 1437–1443, 2006.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  74. Sakka SG, Klein M, Reinhart K, Meier-Hellmann A. Prognostic value of extravascular lung water in critically ill patients. Chest 122: 2080–2086, 2002.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  75. Sakka SG, Rühl CC, Pfeiffer UJ, Beale R, McLuckie A, Reinhart K, Meier-Hellmann A. Assessment of cardiac preload and extravascular lung water by single transpulmonary thermodilution. Intensive Care Med 26: 180–187, 2000.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  76. Schreiber T, Huter L, Schwarzkopf K, Schubert H, Preussler N, Bloos F, Gaser E, Karzai W. Lung perfusion affects preload assessment and lung water calculation with the transpulmonary double indicator method. Intensive Care Med 27: 1814–1818, 2001.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  77. Schuller D, Mitchell JP, Calandrino FS, Schuster DP. Fluid balance during pulmonary edema. Is fluid gain a marker or a cause of poor outcome? Chest 100: 1068–1075, 1991.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  78. Schuster DP. The search for "objective" criteria for ARDS. Intensive Care Med 33: 400–402, 2007.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  79. Schuster DP, Calandrino FS. Single versus double indicator dilution measurements of extra vascular lung water. Crit Care Med 19: 84–88, 1991.[Web of Science][Medline]
  80. Shepherd CW. Basic principles of the tracer method: introduction to mathematical tracer kinetics. New York: Wiley & Sons, 1962.
  81. Sibbald WJ, Short AK, Warshawski FJ, Cunningham DG, Cheung H. Thermal dye measurement of extravascular lung water in critically ill patients. Chest 87: 585–592, 1985.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  82. Staub NC, Hyde RW, Crandall E. NHLBI workshop summary. Workshop on techniques to evaluate lung alveolar-microvascular injury. Am Rev Respir Dis 141: 1071–1077, 1990.[Web of Science][Medline]
  83. Szakmany T, Heigl P, Molnar Z. Correlation between extravascular lung water and oxygenation in ALI/ARDS patients with septic shock. Anaesth Intensive Care 32: 196–201, 2004.[Web of Science][Medline]
  84. Tomashefski JF Jr, Davies P, Boggis C, Greene R, Zapol WM, Reid LM. The pulmonary vascular lesions of the adult respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Pathol 112: 112–126, 1983.[Abstract]
  85. Vesconi S, Rossi GP, Pesenti A, Fumagalli R, Gattinoni L. Pulmonary microthrombosis in severe adult respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 16: 111–113, 1988.[Web of Science][Medline]
  86. Wallin CJ, Rosblad PG, Leksell LG. Quantitative estimation of errors in the indicator dilution measurement of extravascular lung water. Intensive Care Med 23: 469–475, 1997.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  87. Wang Y, Shepherd JT, Marshall RJ. Evaluation of the slope-volume method as an index of pulmonary blood volume. J Clin Invest 39: 466–472, 1960.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  88. Wangensteen D, Bachofen H, Weibel ER. Lung tissue volume changes induced by hypertonic NaCl: morphometric evaluation. J Appl Physiol 51: 1443–1450, 1981.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  89. West JB, Dollery CT. Distribution of blood flow and ventilation-perfusion ratio in the lung measured with radioactive CO2. J Appl Physiol 15: 405–410, 1960.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  90. Wickerts CJ, Jakobsson J, Frostell C, Hedenstierna G. Measurement of extravascular lung water by thermal-dye dilution technique: mechanisms of cardiac output dependence. Intensive Care Med 16: 115–120, 1990.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol.Home page
L. M. Brown, K. D. Liu, and M. A. Matthay
Measurement of extravascular lung water using the single indicator method in patients: research and potential clinical value
Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol, October 1, 2009; 297(4): L547 - L558.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol.Home page
M. A. Matthay
Measurement of extravascular lung water in patients with pulmonary edema
Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol, June 1, 2008; 294(6): L1021 - L1022.
[Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Figure
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
294/6/L1023    most recent
00533.2007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Effros, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Casaburi, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Effros, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Casaburi, R.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the American Physiological Society.