Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2021 Mar 17;16(3):e0248214. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248214

Electrical impedance tomography in pulmonary arterial hypertension

André L D Hovnanian 1,*, Eduardo L V Costa 1, Susana Hoette 1, Caio J C S Fernandes 1, Carlos V P Jardim 1, Bruno A Dias 1, Luciana T K Morinaga 1, Marcelo B P Amato 1, Rogério Souza 1
Editor: James West2
PMCID: PMC7968654  PMID: 33730110

Abstract

The characterization of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) relies mainly on right heart catheterization (RHC). Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) provides a non-invasive estimation of lung perfusion that could complement the hemodynamic information from RHC. To assess the association between impedance variation of lung perfusion (ΔZQ) and hemodynamic profile, severity, and prognosis, suspected of PAH or worsening PAH patients were submitted simultaneously to RHC and EIT. Measurements of ΔZQ were obtained. Based on the results of the RHC, 35 patients composed the PAH group, and eight patients, the normopressoric (NP) group. PAH patients showed a significantly reduced ΔZQ compared to the NP group. There was a significant correlation between ΔZQ and hemodynamic parameters, particularly with stroke volume (SV) (r = 0.76; P < 0.001). At 60 months, 15 patients died (43%) and 1 received lung transplantation; at baseline they had worse hemodynamics, and reduced ΔZQ when compared to survivors. Patients with low ΔZQ (≤154.6%.Kg) presented significantly worse survival (P = 0.033). ΔZQ is associated with hemodynamic status of PAH patients, with disease severity and survival, demonstrating EIT as a promising tool for monitoring patients with pulmonary vascular disease.

Introduction

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a progressive disease of the pulmonary circulation encompassing an intense vascular remodeling process, leading to severe disruption of vascular mechanics, right ventricle dysfunction and, ultimately, premature death [1, 2]. Right heart catheterization (RHC) remains the most appropriate method for PAH diagnosis with significant prognostic information [2]. Although different imaging modalities provide significant noninvasive information about pulmonary vascular physiology, PAH severity as well as prognosis [36], methods for estimation of lung perfusion remain scarce.

Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) is a non-invasive imaging tool that identifies both lung ventilation and perfusion simultaneously based on measurements of thoracic impedance changes [7]. While the entry of air in the lungs causes impedance to increase, because of its low resistivity, the flow of blood into the pulmonary circulation during systole leads to a decrease in the thoracic impedance signal. Since these two phenomena occur at different frequencies, it is possible to separate the signal of perfusion from that of ventilation [8].

Despite the potential for clinical application, there is limited information about the use of EIT on PAH patients. In one study of eight patients with idiopathic PAH (IPAH), a single patient responded to the vasodilatation test; in this patient, there was correlation between impedance change related to lung perfusion (ΔZQ) and the change on pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) and mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP). The authors suggested that EIT reliably measured pulmonary intra-vascular blood volume changes [9]. In another study [10], there was a significantly reduced ΔZQ in IPAH compared to healthy volunteers, probably indicating an impairment of pulmonary vascular mechanics. Our hypothesis is that EIT carries pathophysiological information, reflecting PAH severity.

The main objective of this study was to assess EIT as a noninvasive prognostic imaging modality in PAH through its ability to reflect PAH severity according to RHC findings. Thus, the association between ΔZQ and the hemodynamic profile, disease severity, and survival of PAH patients was evaluated.

Materials and methods

The study received the approval of the Research Ethics Committee of the Heart Institute, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, approval number: 1392/06. The form of consent obtained was written.

Study population and design

We prospectively studied adult patients with suspected PAH or diagnosed PAH referred for invasive hemodynamic evaluation. For those patients under diagnostic evaluation, pulmonary hypertension was suspected by the combination of suggested symptoms/signs plus the finding of systolic PAP ≥40 mmHg in the transthoracic echocardiography. All other patients included in the study already had the diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension (Table 1).

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the study population.

  NP PAH p
  (n = 8) (n = 35)  
Demographics
    Sex, Female:Male 6 (3): 2 (1) 26 (2.9): 9 (1)  
    Age, years 40.1 ± 15 42.8 ± 14.5 0.37
    Weight, Kg.m-2 62.4 ± 15 65.9 ± 16.2 0.29
    Height, m 1.56 ± 0.06 1.60 ± 0.1 0.11
Functional Class
    CF I/II 8 (100%) 24 (68,6%) 0.90
    CF III/IV - 11 (31,4%)
Biomarkers
    BNP (ng/dL) 65.6 ± 105.4 247 ± 304.3 0.006
Hemodynamics
    mPAP, mm Hg 19.1 ± 4 55.5 ± 16.2 <0.001
    PWP, mm Hg 9.1 ± 3.4 10.4 ± 3.1 0.15
    SV, mL 75.6 ± 22.6 53.7 ± 18.7 0.013
    CO, L.min-1 6.4 ± 2.2 4.1 ± 1.1 <0.001
    PVR, Woods 2.3 ± 1.6 11.7 ± 6.4 <0.001
    Compl, mL.mm Hg-1 4.6 ± 2.2 1.3 ± 0.9 <0.001
Etiologies
    IPAH - 15 (42.9%)  
    CTD 3 (37.5%) 9 (25.7%)  
    Schistosomiasis - 4 (11.4%)  
    Portopulmonary 3 (37.5%) 3 (8.6%)  
    HIV - 2 (5.7%)  
    Congenital cardiac shunts - 2 (5.7%)  
    Sickle cell disease 1 (12.5%) -  
    Other 1 (12.5%) -
Treatment
    Sildenafil - 9 (25.7%)  
    Bosentan - 3 (8.6%)  
    Combined therapy - 5 (14.3%)  
    Naïve - 18 (51.4%)  

Definitions of abbreviations: NP = normopressoric; PAH = pulmonary arterial hypertension; BNP = brain natriuretic peptide; mPAP = mean pulmonary arterial pressure; PWP = pulmonary wedge pressure; SV = stroke volume; CO = cardiac output; NYAH = New York Heart Association; PVR = pulmonary vascular resistance; PVC = pulmonary vascular compliance; IPAH = idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension; CTD = collagenous tissue diseases; HIV = human immunodeficiency virus; PDE5i = phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors; ERA = endothelin-1 receptor antagonists.

The continuous variables are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD), when normally distributed, and otherwise as median and interquartile [25–75%] ranges.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension was defined by a resting mPAP ≥25 mmHg during RHC, with a pulmonary wedge pressure (PWP) ≤15 mmHg, in the absence of significant lung parenchyma disease, left heart dysfunction and chronic thromboembolic disease [2, 11]. The EIT acquisition was performed simultaneously to RHC. Based on RHC findings, patients were discriminated into 2 groups: PAH group and those with normal hemodynamics, named here as “normopressoric” (NP) group.

The study was conducted at the Hemodynamic Laboratory of a tertiary pulmonary hypertension reference center. After the diagnosis of PAH, all the patients were followed periodically on an outpatient basis at the same institution. There were no losses to follow-up.

The protocol was approved by the local ethics committee and all participants gave written informed consent.

Right heart catheterization

A complete hemodynamic invasive evaluation was performed in all patients using standard techniques for RHC [7]. Hemodynamic measurements included mean right atrial pressure, mPAP, PWP, and cardiac output (CO) determined by the thermodilution technique. Cardiac index (CI) was calculated as CO divided by body surface area. Pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) was calculated as (mPAP–PWP) divided by CO. Pulmonary vascular compliance (PVC) was calculated as systolic volume (SV) divided by pulse pressure (systolic PAP–diastolic PAP).

EIT protocol

The EIT measurements and image acquisition were performed with the platform Enlight 1800, a 32-electrode device (Timpel, Sao Paulo, Brazil).

Image acquisition protocol

The 32-electrodes were attached circumferentially to the surface of the patients’ thorax at about the level of the fourth intercostal space. The EKG-gated technique was used in order to eliminate the ventilatory impedance oscillations [12]. Patients remained under resting condition, in supine position. One hundred cardiac cycles were automatically averaged to obtain one complete data set. Image files were recorded for 3 minutes for posterior off-line analysis. Since the obtained impedance images are relative images, the measurement of ΔZQ are expressed as percent values (%).

Off-line image analysis

The recorded file was analyzed using a dedicated software developed in Labview 7.1 (National Instruments, USA). This software was validated in another study from our group [13]. A temporal series of 50 images per second was acquired, each image comprising a 32x32 matrix, in which each value represented a pixel.

To quantify the impedance change within the lungs from the images, we analyzed the images using regions of interest (ROI). ROI analysis was performed using individual masks for each file for both ventilation and perfusion [14]. We built perfusion masks following a stepwise approach, as follows: 1. Cardiac pixels–which include the potential anatomical areas corresponding to both the heart and the great vessels–tend to be out of phase with lung pixels, because the lungs receive the blood ejected during systole. Based on the phase lag of each pixel in the EKG-gated image and a typical lung pixel, cardiac pixels were automatically excluded; 2. Typical lung pixels were determined by the identification of a decrease in ΔZQ value in the ΔZQ vs. time curves immediately after the point corresponding to EKG-gating (Fig 2); 3. The lung mask comprised of all pixels after the exclusion of cardiac pixels; 4. The sum of the mask-derived pixel amplitudes was multiplied by body weight [14] to yield the ΔZQ measure.

Fig 2.

Fig 2

EIT images and ΔZQ vs. time curves of the pulmonary arterial hypertension group (A) and of the normopressoric group (B). The dashed lines represent the pixels corresponding to the pulmonary area; the central yellow area corresponds to the pixels with higher ΔZQ values, while the dark-red regions to the pixels with lower ΔZQ values; * refers to the cardiac pixels. Below, the ΔZQ vs. time curves: the red points indicate gating to the QRS complex of the ECG–it correlates with ventricular systole and filling of the pulmonary circulation, which is responsible for the descent of the ΔZQ value; note the difference in the amplitude and waveforms.

Statistical analysis

The continuous variables are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD), when normally distributed, otherwise as median and interquartile [25–75%] ranges. The Student t-test and the Mann-Whitney test were used for group comparison, as appropriate. The Fisher exact test was used to compare categorical variables. For the estimation of the correlation between the ΔZQ and hemodynamic parameters, we used the Pearson correlation analysis. ΔZQ was dichotomized in low vs high ΔZQ based on its median value. Survival curves were described using the Kaplan-Meier Product Time Limit method, and the low vs high ΔZQ groups were compared with the Log-rank test. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated with Cox proportional hazards analysis in a multivariable model in which both ΔZQ and BNP were included. P values <0.05 were considered significant. The analysis was performed using SPSS software, version 17.0) and R (version 3.0.2).

Results

A total of 55 patients were submitted to RHC. The hemodynamic measurements were normal in eight patients, who represented the normopressoric group. Forty-seven patients received the diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension, of whom 12 were excluded (6 due to EIT signal/file problems; 4 due to PWP >15 mm Hg; and 2 patients due to lack of reliable measure of CO). Thirty-five patients composed the PAH group.

Baseline characteristics of both groups are presented in Table 1. All NP patients were symptomatic at the time of the RHC. Only 30% of the PAH patients had NYHA III/IV, despite a severe hemodynamic profile. The brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels were normal in NP group and were consistently elevated in the PAH group. Six etiologies of PAH were identified, of which 70% were composed by idiopathic PAH (IPAH) and connective tissue disease associated PAH (CTD_PAH). More than half of the PAH group was composed of newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve patients.

ΔZQ was significantly lower in the PAH group compared to the NP group (177.8±90.3 vs. 277.8±160.5%.Kg; p = 0.046) (Fig 1). Fig 2 illustrates the typical images of ΔZQ and its respective variation over time for both groups.

Fig 1. Comparison between the ΔZQ value of the pulmonary arterial hypertension group and the normopressoric group.

Fig 1

ΔZQ correlated with mPAP, PVC, PVR, CO, and especially with SV (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Correlations between ΔZQ and invasive hemodynamic parameters.

Fig 3

During follow-up, 15 patients died and one received bilateral lung transplantation successfully. Fourteen of them were female (87%). There was no difference in mean age between survivors and non-survivors. Non-survivors had a worse hemodynamic profile: CO (3.6±1.0 vs. 4.7±1.2 L/min; p = 0.004), SV (44.2±12.1 vs. 63.9±19 mL; p < 0.001), mPAP (60.4±13.7 vs. 47.8±16.8 mmHg; p = 0.01), PVR (14.6±6.6 vs. 8.6±4.6 Woods Unit (WU); p = 0.02), PVC (0.9±0.3 vs. 1.8±1.2 mL.mmHg-1; p = 0.002); there was no difference in PWP (10.3±3.1 vs. 10.4±3.2 mL.mmHg-1; p = NS).

ΔZQ was significantly reduced in the non-survivors in comparison to the survivors (127.2±54.3 vs. 231.6±91%.Kg; p < 0.001) (Fig 4).

Fig 4. Comparison between the ΔZQ value of the survivors and the nonsurvivors groups.

Fig 4

Patients with low ΔZQ (≤154.6%.Kg) also had a worse hemodynamic profile when compared to the patients with high ΔZQ: CO (3.8±1.3 vs. 4.5±1.1 L/min; p = 0.037), SV (45.3±15.4 vs. 62.7±18 mL; p = 0.002), mPAP (62.3±12 vs. 45.8±16.3 mmHg; p < 0.001), PVR (15.1±6.5 vs. 8±3.9 WU; p < 0.001), PVC (0.9±0.4 vs. 1.7±1.2 mL.mmHg-1; p = 0.004); there was no difference in PWP (9.9±3.8 vs. 11±2.2 mL.mmHg-1; p = NS).

BNP measurements were available in 28 patients. In a multivariable analysis, ΔZQ independently predicted survival (HR 0.98, 95%CI 0.97–0.99; p = 0.011) whereas BNP did not (HR 1.0, 95%CI 0.99–1.0; p = 0.928).

The median survival in the low-ΔZQ group was 3.94 years, while median survival was not reached in the high-ΔZQ group. Patients with low ΔZQ (≤154.6%.Kg) had presented a worse survival when compared to the patients with high ΔZQ (p = 0.033) (Fig 5).

Fig 5. Kaplan-Meier transplant-free survival estimates in the high-ΔZQ group (black) and in the low-ΔZQ group (red) according to the median of the ΔZQ.

Fig 5

Discussion

The present study analyzed the application of EIT, an emergent imaging modality, to patients with suspected or confirmed PAH. Our results demonstrated that ΔZQ shows a significant association with the hemodynamic profile, the disease severity, and the prognosis of PAH patients.

Seventy-five percent of our PAH group were composed by women, with mean age in the fifth decade of life, and nutritional status in the range of overweight. These findings are in line with the data from recent registries [1517]. Furthermore, our patients, the majority of whom had IPAH or CTD_PAH, had severe and advanced forms of PAH evidenced by their poor hemodynamic profile.

Patients with PAH presented with a significantly reduced ΔZQ in comparison to the NP individuals. A similar result was presented by a Dutch study, in 2006, which identified an important reduction in ΔZQ in 21 patients with IPAH compared to 30 healthy volunteers [10]. Nevertheless, three different aspects between the two studies are relevant: first, we used a newer generation of EIT technology which comprises a 32x32 pixel matrix, a noncircular mesh and a better image temporal resolution; second, our control group was composed of patients with conditions related to PAH, all symptomatic, who had clinical indication for RHC, but did not confirm the presence of pulmonary hypertension. These patients where named here as normopressoric (NP) and represented more than 14% (8/55) of the patients referred to RHC, and more than 30% (8/26) of those who performed the RHC in search for PH diagnosis. In a study from our group, about 20% of the individuals that underwent RHC as part of the diagnostic evaluation for the presence of pulmonary hypertension presented normal pressure levels [18]. Distinctly of health volunteers, it is not possible to assert that the NP patients do not have incipient disease. Even so, there was a significant difference between the PAH and the NP groups [19]. Including patients with indication for RHC rather than healthy volunteers in the control group was important to avoid spectrum bias. Finally, our PAH group was composed of six different forms of PAH whereas only IPAH patients were included in the Dutch study. Our patient mix reflects more closely patients with suspected PAH in clinical practice.

The second relevant finding of our study refers to the correlation of the ΔZQ to the hemodynamic profile. The ΔZQ correlated both to PVC and PVR, mechanical constituents of pulmonary circulation, as well as to SV, the surrogate of right ventricular function. Only one clinical study observed correlation of ΔZQ to hemodynamic parameters in a single patient who presented a progressive increase in ΔZQ parallel to a decrease in mPAP and PVR during the vasoreactivity test [9]. Correlation between ΔZQ and SV was not evaluated in that study. On the other hand, our study demonstrated significant correlations between ΔZQ and all hemodynamic parameters except for PWP. Such a difference can be explained by two factors: (i) our population was composed of 43 patients with hemodynamic data–to the best of our knowledge, this is the largest clinical investigation of EIT in PAH in the presence of simultaneous hemodynamic data; and (ii) our systematic approach to exclude non-pulmonary pixels [20]. Thus, our measurement of ΔZQ probably reflected more accurately the actual magnitude of the pulmonary intra-vascular blood volume variation, illustrating the so sought non-invasive and functional information about the microvascular pulmonary bed. This finding can place EIT as a promising form of assessing the pulmonary circulation physiology and PAH pathophysiology.

Another noteworthy result of our study is the correlation between ΔZQ and SV. An MRI study demonstrated that indexed SV <25 mL.(m2)-1 and indexed right ventricular diastolic volume >84 mL.(m2)-1 were significantly associated with worse prognosis in IPAH [5]. Stroke volume has a pivotal role on the severity and survival of PAH patients, especially because it represents the impairment of the right ventricle (RV) due to the pathological changes in pulmonary vascular mechanics. A recent study [21] suggested that SV provides significant prognostic information even in patients already stratified as presenting low-risk of disease progression. Despite some difficulties reported in estimating SV by means of EIT [22], one can also understand EIT as a non-invasive tool for assessment of disease severity given the good correlation of SV and ΔZQ (r = 0.76; p < 0.001) in our study as well as in an experimental study of our group [14]. This assumption is strengthened by the finding of an even more pronounced reduction of ΔZQ in the 16 patients who died or received lung transplantation during follow-up, in accordance with a significant worse hemodynamic profile in this group, including a significantly lower SV.

In the current state of PAH management, even after great achievements in the understanding and management, overall mortality in PAH is still elevated [17, 2325]. In our study, the median survival in the low ΔZQ group was almost four years, and EIT was capable of discriminating those patients with higher risk of death or lung transplantation. Risk assessment is paramount in estimating the prognosis of PAH patients during follow-up [2527]. Multidimensional scores combining clinical, echocardiographic, biological, hemodynamic, and exercise variables have been used to stratify patients in low or high-risk of death or lung transplantation [2527]. These scores have used noninvasive parameters in an attempt to improve the prognostic ability of invasive hemodynamic parameters. We showed that electrical impedance tomography is also a non-invasive method that carries prognostic information in PAH patients. Thus, it is reasonable to suggest the incorporation of EIT in future multimodal scores as well as its use for the serial follow-up assessments of PAH patients.

Two aspects related to the EIT assessment are noteworthy. The first was our choice to only include lung pixels on the pulsatility analysis. This approach is better than measuring the heart pulsatility because the heart position in relation to the electrode belt can introduce measurement error [11, 22]. Additionally, lung pulsatility can further decrease in more severe PAH because of lower vascular compliance. The second aspect was the correction to body weight. As well as in a recent experimental study of our group [14], that also observed a strong association between ΔZQ and SV, the correlation between ΔZQ and SV was improved by the incorporation of weight to the ΔZQ value. Since EIT measurements are relative images based on changes in impedance in relation to a reference, the ΔZQ is expressed as a percentage change in impedance in relation to the reference condition. The advantage of this approach is the improvement in the robustness of the image reconstruction. In contrast, it produces outputs that are insensible to the absolute values of impedance. It means that an equal absolute perturbation inside thoraces of different sizes and different muscle-to-fat proportion will produce distinct impedance changes, reinforcing the importance of anthropometric correction.

Additionally, information about reproducibility and feasibility deserves consideration. The reproducibility of EIT has been studied in both ventilation and perfusion studies [22, 2831]. In a model for estimating SV by means of EIT, compared to cardiac MRI, a mean error of -10±12.8 mL was found [30]. Two of these studies [22, 31] showed that the core difficulty in EIT-based SV monitoring is that purely amplitude-based features (that is the case of our study) are strongly influenced by other factors: posture, electrode contact impedance and lung or heart conductivity. The EIT technology consists in installing two auto-adhesive belts over the thorax of a patient by a trained technician. Each belt is connected to a cable that transfers information between the belts and the (trans-)portable EIT device, whose digital/touchable interface also allows a simple operation by a trained technician. These characteristics demonstrate the feasibility of EIT for bedside evaluation in hospitalized patients [32], and probably for the outpatient ones.

Our study has some limitations. First, we did not explore the potential of EIT as a diagnostic tool for pulmonary hypertension, and we only monitored each patient once. Second, there are some limitations related to the EIT technology itself. EKG-gating requires a regular heart rhythm. In patients with arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation, ΔZQ can be significantly influenced by the ventilation signal. As a result, six patients were excluded because of inadequate image reconstruction or filtering. Additionally, it is known that the pulsatile signal at the cardiac frequency is not purely due to lung perfusion: the impedance changes related to vascular lung pulses can be related to other determinants such as PAP and surrounding lung tissue compliance [33]. The indicator dilution technique could help in the understanding if our results would express strictly lung perfusion [34].

Finally, there are still many challenges ahead before EIT can be incorporated in the field of pulmonary hypertension. Many gaps of knowledge should be explored in future studies. For example, the usefulness of EIT for the diagnosis of PAH or for monitoring response to PAH specific treatment is yet unknown.

In conclusion, given its close association with the hemodynamic profile, disease severity, and survival of PAH patients, EIT can be seen as a promising non-invasive tool for monitoring patients with pulmonary vascular disease.

Supporting information

S1 Data

(CSV)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This study was supported by FAPESP (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo). http://www.fapesp.br/ The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Hoeper MM, Humbert M, Souza R, et al. A global view of pulmonary hypertension. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(4):306–22. 10.1016/S2213-2600(15)00543-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Eur Heart J. 2015; 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv317 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Humbert M, Morrell NW, Archer SL, et al. Cellular and molecular pathobiology of pulmonary arterial hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:13S–24S. 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.02.029 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Forfia PR, Fisher MR, Mathai FC, et al. Tricuspid annular displacement predicts survival in pulmonary hypertension. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;174:1034–41. 10.1164/rccm.200604-547OC [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.van Wolferen SA, Marcus JT, Boonstra A, et al. Prognostic value of right ventricular mass, volume, and function in idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:1250–7. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehl477 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Vonk-Noordegraaf A, Souza R. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: what can it add to our knowledge of the right ventricle in pulmonary arterial hypertension? Am J Cardiol. 2012;110(6 Suppl):25S–31S. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.06.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Costa ELV, Amato MBP. Electrical impedance tomography in critical ill patients. Clin Pulm Med. 2013;20(4):178–86. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Smit HJ, Vonk Noordegraaf A, Marcus JT, Boonstra A, de Vries PM, Postmus PV. Determinants of pulmonary perfusion measured by electrical impedance tomography. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2004;92:45–9. 10.1007/s00421-004-1043-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Smit HJ, Vonk Noordegraaf A, Roeleveld RJ, et al. Epoprostenol-induced vasodilatation in patients with pulmonary hypertension measured by electrical impedance tomography. Physiol Meas. 2002;23:237–43. 10.1088/0967-3334/23/1/324 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Smit HJ, Vonk Noordegraaf A, Boonstra A, Vries PM, Postmus PE. Assessment of the pulmonary volume pulse in idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension by means of electrical impedance tomography. Respiration. 2006;73:597–602 10.1159/000088694 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Costa ELV, Jardim C, Bogossian HGB, Amato MBP, Carvalho CRR, Souza R. Acute vasodilator test in pulmonary arterial hypertension: Evaluation of two response criteria. Vascular Pharmacology. 2005,43:143–7. 10.1016/j.vph.2005.05.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Eyüboglu BM, Brown BH, Barber DC, Seagar AD. Localization of cardiac related impedance changes in the thorax. Clin Phys Physiol Meas. 1987,8:167–73. 10.1088/0143-0815/8/4a/021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.da Silva Ramos FJ, Hovnanian A, Souza R, Azevedo LCP, Amato MBP, Costa ELV. Estimation of stroke volume and stroke volume changes by electrical impedance tomography. Anesth Analg. 2018;126(1):102–10. 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002271 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Proença M, Braun F, Solà J, et al. Non-invasive monitoring of pulmonary artery pressure from timing information by EIT: experimental evaluation during induced hypoxia. Physiol Meas. 2016;3:713–36. 10.1088/0967-3334/37/6/713 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Frost AE, Badesch DB, Barst RJ, et al. The changing picture of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension in the United States. How REVEAL differs from historic and non-US contemporary registries. Chest. 2011;139(1):128–37. 10.1378/chest.10-0075 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ling Y, Johnson MK, Kiely DG, et al. Changing demographics, epidemiology, and survival of incident pulmonary hypertension results: results from the pulmonary hypertension registry of the United Kingdom and Ireland. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(8):790–6. 10.1164/rccm.201203-0383OC [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Alves JL Jr, Gavilanes F, Jardim C, et al. Pulmonary arterial hypertension in the southern hemisphere. Results from a registry of incident brazilian cases. Chest. 2015;147(2):495–501. 10.1378/chest.14-1036 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Gavilanes F, Alves JL Jr, Fernandes C, et al. Left ventricular disfunction in patients with suspected pulmonary arterial hypertension. J Bras Pneumol. 2014; 40(6):609–16. 10.1590/S1806-37132014000600004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Whyte K, Hoette S, Hervé P, et al. The association between rest and mild-to-moderate exercise pulmonar artery pressure. Eur Respir J. 2012;39(2):313–8. 10.1183/09031936.00019911 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Tanaka H, Ortega NRS, Galizia MS, Borges JB, Amato MBP. Fuzzy modeling of electrical impedance tomography image of the lungs. Clinics. 2008;63(3):363–70. 10.1590/s1807-59322008000300013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Weatherald J, Boucly A, Chemla D, et al. Prognostic value of follow-up hemodynamic variables after initial management in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Circulation. 2018;137:693–704. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.029254 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Braun F, Proença M, Adler A, Riedel T, Thiran J-P, Solà J. Accuracy and reliability of noninvasive stroke volume monitoring via ECG-gated 3D electrical impedance tomography in healthy volunteers. PLoS One. 2018;13(1):e0191870. 10.1371/journal.pone.0191870 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Humbert M, Montani D, Souza R. Predicting survival in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Time to combine markers. Chest. 2011;139(6):1263–4. 10.1378/chest.10-2868 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Delcroix M, Staehler G, Gall H, et al. Risk assessment in medically treated chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension patients. Eur Respir J. 2018;52(5):180024 10.1183/13993003.00248-2018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Galiè N, Humbert M, Vachiery J-L, et al. 2015 ESC/ERS Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension: the Joint Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS). Eur Heart J. 2016;37: 67–119. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv317 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Boucly Athénaïs, Weatherald Jason, Savale Laurent, et al. Risk assessment, prognosis and guideline implementation in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2017;50(2):1700889. 10.1183/13993003.00889-2017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Boucly A, Weatherald J, Humbert M, Sitbon O. Risk assessment in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2018;51(3):1800279. 10.1183/13993003.00279-2018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Frerichs I, Schmitz G, Pulletz S, et al. Reproducibility of regional lung ventilation distribution measured by electrical impedance tomography during mechanical ventilation. Physiol Meas. 2007;28(7):S261–7. 10.1088/0967-3334/28/7/S19 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Reifferscheid F, Elke G, Pulletz S, et al. Regional ventilation distribution determined by electrical impedance tomography: reproducibility and effects of posture and chest plane. Respirology. 2011;16(3):523–31. 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2011.01929.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Proença M. IEEE Biomedical Circuits and Systems Conference (BioCAS) Proceedings. IEEE Trans Biomed Circuits Syst. 2014;8(5):605–750. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Braun F, Proença M, Wendler A, et al. Noninvasive measurement of stroke volume changes in critically ill patients by means of electrical impedance tomography. J Clin Monit Comput. 2020;34(5):903–11. 10.1007/s10877-019-00402-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Bachmann MC, Morais C, Bugedo G, et al. Electrical impedance tomography in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care. 2018;22(1):263. 10.1186/s13054-018-2195-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Hellige G, Hahn G. Cardiac-related impedance changes obtained by electrical impedance tomography: an acceptable parameter for assessment of pulmonary perfusion? Critical Care. 2011;15:430. 10.1186/cc10231 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Borges JB, Suarez-Sipmann F, Bohm SH, et al. Regional lung perfusion estimated by electrical impedance tomography in a piglet model of lung collapse. J Appl Physiol. 2012;112:225–36. 10.1152/japplphysiol.01090.2010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

James West

10 Sep 2020

PONE-D-20-26452

Electrical impedance tomography in pulmonary arterial hypertension

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. HOVNANIAN,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

As you can see, one of the reviewers has found a significant number of areas where additional data would be needed to be certain that the outcomes are technically correct - and both reviewers were in agreement that the number of control patients was a significant limitation. The revisions requested may be outside the scope of revision, but you may feel that you can reasonably address them.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 25 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

James West, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

3. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate "supporting information" files

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This is an excellent study expanding on a clinical assessment that has limited information available at this time. The study was performed in a scientifically sound manner, and presented in a clear, easy to follow and logical manner. The greatest limitation is the small sample size in the study, but given the novel idea this can be overlooked as the incidnce of the disease is also low.

Reviewer #2: In the present study the authors proposed the use of the electrical impedance tomography for the definition of pulmonary arterial hypertension. Non-invasive identification of PAH is very attractive, since it'd allow to reduce the need of invasive right heart cath. Despite the interesting pathophysiological background, the study suffers of several limitations:

- the limited number of patients, in particular of the "healthy" cohort

- how the patients were selected? were they consecutive? Why patients with normal RHC were referred for the invasive procedure? Were they ill?

- How PH was suspected? Was it based on transthoracic echocardiograhy findings?

- the authors excluded pts with post-cap PH. I'd suggest to compare pre-cap with post-cap since the most intriguing aspect might be the differentiation between vascular abnormalities in pre and post-capillary PH

- Information on feasibility, costs and reproducibility of the test should be provided

- echocardiography represents the screening exam for the identification of PH. I'd appreciate a comparison between the performance of echo and EIT. The superiority/complementarity of the two techniques should be discussed

- EIT much strongly correlates with stroke volume. In PAH cohort stroke volume is obviously reduced compared to healthy subjects. How can the authors exclude that EIT could present similar correlation in other diseases determining reduced stroke volume (i.e. HFrEF, valve diseases, etc)

- since most of patients were treatment naive it'd be interesting to assess the trends of EIT longitudinally after treatment initiation

- for all the limitations above, the authors should consider to completely eliminate the paragraph on outcome. I don't feel it necessary since the goal of the study is mostly focused on diagnosis rather than prognostication

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Alec S Kellish

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Decision Letter 1

James West

31 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-26452R1

Electrical impedance tomography in pulmonary arterial hypertension

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. HOVNANIAN,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

The current recommendations are primarily around being more cautious in conclusions, and doing a more thorough job of addressing the remaining barriers to inclusion in clinical process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 14 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

James West, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #3: Dear authors, below are a series of comments regarding the format and content of your manuscript.

1. Be careful with abbreviations, the use of PAH and PH confuses the reader and it must be ensured that the same abbreviation format is used throughout the text (page 3 line 96).

2. A paragraph related to patient follow-up would be appreciated in the methodology section.

3. The importance and need of using EIT is not clear, it is a new tool that requires trained personnel and offline analysis with special software, it is expensive (the disposable belts from Timpel) and in the text you mention that "SV provides significant prognostic information " why is this not enough? I suggest to emphasize the importance of multidimensional evaluation in PAH, to justify the use of this new tool.

4. Considering the limitations mentioned in the manuscript, I personally find your conclusion quite ambitious. Much remains to be known and validated before saying "could be incorporated in the routine evaluation of PAH patients".

Perhaps you could incorporate a paragraph mentioning future challenges and next steps related to the use of EIT for the diagnosis and follow-up of PAH.

They are minor suggestions, congratulations on your excellent work.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Decision Letter 2

James West

23 Feb 2021

Electrical impedance tomography in pulmonary arterial hypertension

PONE-D-20-26452R2

Dear Dr. HOVNANIAN,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

James West, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

James West

1 Mar 2021

PONE-D-20-26452R2

Electrical impedance tomography in pulmonary arterial hypertension

Dear Dr. Hovnanian:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. James West

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Data

    (CSV)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewer.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES