Abnormal dynamic ventilation function of COVID-19 survivors detected by pulmonary free-breathing proton MRI.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To visualize and quantitatively assess regional lung function of survivors of COVID-19 who were hospitalized using pulmonary free-breathing 1H MRI. METHODS: A total of 12 healthy volunteers and 27 COVID-19 survivors (62.4 ± 8.1 days between infection and image acquisition) were recruited in this prospective study and performed chest 1H MRI acquisitions with free tidal breathing. Then, conventional Fourier decomposition ventilation (FD-V) and global fractional ventilation (FVGlobal) were analyzed. Besides, a modified PREFUL (mPREFUL) method was developed to adapt to COVID-19 survivors and generate dynamic ventilation maps and parameters. All the ventilation maps and parameters were analyzed using Student's t-test. Pearson's correlation and a Bland-Altman plot between FVGlobal and mPREFUL were analyzed. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between COVID-19 and healthy groups regarding a static FD-V map (0.47 ± 0.12 vs 0.42 ± 0.08; p = .233). However, mPREFUL demonstrated lots of regional high ventilation areas (high ventilation percentage (HVP) 23.7% ± 10.6%) existed in survivors. This regional heterogeneity (i.e., HVP) in survivors was significantly higher than in healthy volunteers (p = .003). The survivors breathed deeper (flow-volume loop 5375 ± 3978 vs 1688 ± 789; p = .005), and breathed more air in respiratory cycle (total amount 62.6 ± 19.3 vs 37.3 ± 9.9; p < .001). Besides, mPREFUL showed both good Pearson's correlation (r = 0.74; p < .001) and Bland-Altman consistency (mean bias = -0.01) with FVGlobal. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic ventilation imaging using pulmonary free-breathing 1H MRI found regional abnormity of dynamic ventilation function in COVID-19 survivors. KEY POINTS • Pulmonary free-breathing1H MRI was used to visualize and quantitatively assess regional lung ventilation function of COVID-19 survivors. • Dynamic ventilation maps generated from 1H MRI were more sensitive to distinguish the COVID-19 and healthy groups (total air amount 62.6 ± 19.3 vs 37.3 ± 9.9; p < .001), compared with static ventilation maps (FD-V value 0.47 ± 0.12 vs 0.42 ± 0.08; p = .233). • COVID-19 survivors had larger regional heterogeneity (high ventilation percentage 23.7% ± 10.6% vs 13.1% ± 7.9%; p = .003), and breathed deeper (flow-volume loop 5375 ± 3978 vs 1688 ± 789; p = .005) than healthy volunteers.