Comparison of two in vivo microscopy techniques to visualize alveolar mechanics
Comparison of two in vivo microscopy techniques to visualize alveolar mechanics
复制标题
两种体内显微镜技术可视化肺泡力学的比较
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
R. Kuhlen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Bickenbach;R. Dembinski;M. Czaplik;S. Meissner;A. Tabuchi;M. Mertens;L. Knels;W. Schroeder;P. Pelosi;E. Koch;W. Kuebler;R. Rossaint;R. Kuhlen
目的在传统的活体显微镜中，缺乏组织的三维图示。关于肺泡网络的显微镜分析，需要对胸腔进行手术准备并固定肺部以放置显微镜的物镜。这些效应可能会影响肺泡的机械行为。存在相对较新的体内显微镜方法，其侵入性较小，并且无需固定肺部即可进行观察。本研究的目的是在小鼠和兔子模型中比较光纤共焦激光扫描显微镜 (FCLSM) 与光学相干断层扫描 (OCT)。此外，FCLSM也在内窥镜下用于兔子模型。方法在右上肺叶下缘切除尽可能小的胸窗，插入胸膜间导管，然后用透明膜箔重新覆盖。 OCT 扫描仪由电机驱动的平移台定位。成像被门控至吸气末平台。对于 CLSM，将 0.1% 荧光素注入中央静脉条纹线。将直径为 650 µm 的共焦探针小心地放置在同一肺部区域。直接实时记录图像，并将观察区域与 FD-OCT 图像进行定性比较。此外，在兔子模型中，在支气管镜视觉控制下通过内窥镜使用 CLSM。在后处理分析中，使用“空气指数”（AI）对拍摄的图像进行分析和比较。结果在小鼠模型中，可以使用这两种技术重新识别完全相同的区域。关于肺泡的形状和大小，可以获得定性可比较的图像。 OCT 图像的 AI 为 40.5%，CLSM 图像的 AI 为 40.1%。在兔子身上，甚至可以通过内窥镜观察肺泡。同样，通过胸窗的 CLSM 的 AI 为 43.2%，通过内窥镜的 CLSM 的 AI 为 43.6%。对于 OCT，在兔子模型中分析出 44.6% 的 AI。结论 FD-OCT 和 CLSM 都提供肺泡结构的高分辨率图像，提供有利于传统显微镜的深度信息。 CLSM 还有助于内窥镜观察肺泡，与通过胸窗获得的图像非常相似。
ObjectiveIn conventional in vivo microscopy, a three dimensional illustration of tissue is lacking. Concerning the microscopic analysis of the pulmonary alveolar network, surgical preparation of the thorax and fixation of the lung is required to place the microscope’s objective. These effects may have influence on the mechanical behaviour of alveoli. Relatively new methods exist for in vivo microscopy being less invasive and enabling an observation without fixation of the lung. The aim of this study was to compare a fibered confocal laser scanning microscopy (FCLSM) with optical coherence tomography (OCT) in a mouse and a rabbit model. Moreover, FCLSM was also used endoscopically in the rabbit model.MethodsSmallest possible thoracic windows were excised at the lower margin of the upper right lung lobe and an interpleural catheter inserted before re-coverage with a transparent membrane foil. The OCT-scanner was positioned by a motor driven translation stage. The imaging was gated to endinspiratory plateau. For CLSM, Fluorescein 0.1% was given into the central venous streak line. The confocal probe with a diameter of 650 µm was carefully positioned at the very same lung region. Images were directly recorded real-time and the observed region qualitatively compared with FD-OCT images. Additionally, in the rabbit model, CLSM was used endoscopically under bronchoscopic sight control. In a post-processing analysis, images taken were analyzed and compared by using an “air index” (AI).ResultsIn the mouse model, the very same region could be re-identified with both techniques. Concerning alveolar shape and size, qualitatively comparable images could be gained. The AI was 40.5% for the OCT and 40.1% for the CLSM images. In the rabbit, even an endoscopic view on alveoli was possible. Likewise AI was 43.2% for CLSM through the thoracic window and 43.6% from endoscopically. For the OCT an AI of 44.6% was analysed in the rabbit model.ConclusionsBoth FD-OCT and CLSM provide high-resolution images of alveolar structure giving depth information that is beneficial to conventional microscopy. CLSM also facilitates endoscopic view on alveoli being well comparable to images gained through a thoracic window.