Cited by 85Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsRadiation Dose and Imaging

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Differences in Lung and Lobe Volumes between Supine and Standing Positions Scanned with Conventional and Newly Developed 320-Detector-Row Upright CT: Intra-Individual Comparison

Open access

Abstract

Background: No clinical studies to date have compared unilateral lung or lobe volumes between the supine and standing positions. Objectives: To compare lung/lobe volumes on computed tomography (CT) between these two positions and evaluate the correlation between the total lung volume and total lung capacity (TLC) on pulmonary function tests (PFTs). Methods: Thirty-two asymptomatic volunteers underwent both conventional CT (supine position) and upright CT (standing position), during deep inspiration breath-hold, and PFTs on the same day. We measured lung/lobe volumes on CT in each position. Paired t tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: The volumes of the total lung (10.9% increase), right lung (10.3% increase), right upper lobe (8.6% increase), right lower lobe (14.6% increase), left lung (11.6% increase), left upper lobe (7.1% increase), and left lower lobe (16.0% increase) were significantly greater in the standing position than in the supine position (all p < 0.0001). The right middle lobe volume was similar between the two positions (p = 0.16). Intraclass correlation coefficients for agreement between total lung volumes on CT in the supine/standing positions and the TLC on PFT were 0.891/0.938, respectively. Conclusions: While the volumes of the bilateral upper and lower lobes and bilateral lungs were significantly greater in the standing than in the supine position, with lower lobes showing larger changes, the right middle lobe volume did not change significantly between positions. The total lung volume on upright CT in the standing position was more similar to TLC on PFT than that in the supine position.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000507265

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The relative volumes of the lung lobes in upright position are: right upper lobe 17.6%, right middle lobe 8.5%, right lower lobe 27.2%, left upper lobe 22.4%, left lower lobe 24.3%.

    “Yamada et al. estimated the relative volumes of the lung lobes in upright position, where the right lung constitutes 53.3% (standard deviation (SD) = 1.3) with the right upper lobe (RUL): 17.6% (SD = 2.3), right middle lobe (RML): 8.5% (SD = 1.4), and right lower lobe (RLL) 27.2% (SD = 2.2). The left lung 46.7% (SD = 1.3), left upper lobe (LUL): 22.4% (SD = 2.0) and left lower lobe (LLL): 24.3% (S”
  • The right lung constitutes 55% and the left 45% of the total lung volume.

    “The five lung lobes have different volumes, and the right lung constitutes 55% and the left 45% of the total lung volume [11–13].”
  • The reference material from Yamada et al. used for the proportion of the volumes of the lobes is based on a limited number of healthy volunteers in another population than the Nordic.

    “Furthermore, the reference material from Yamada et al. used for the proportion of the volumes of the lobes is based on a limited number of healthy volunteers in another population than the Nordic.”
  • The variation in Yamada et al.'s data is low, and the differences found in this study are pronounced, so the risk of erroneous conclusions from using those volumes seems small.

    “However, the variation in their data is low [12], and the differences found here are pronounced, thus, the risk of erroneous conclusions seems to be small.”
  • The relative volume of the right upper lobe is 17.6% of total lung volume.

    “The right upper lobe comprised 31.2% of the tumours and 17.6% of the lung volume.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Yamada, Y., Yamada, M., Yokoyama, Y., Tanabe, A., Matsuoka, S., Niijima, Y., Narita, K., Nakahara, T., Murata, M., Fukunaga, K., Chubachi, S., & Jinzaki, M.
Affiliations
  • Keio University (JP)
  • Keio University Hospital (JP)
Venue
Respiration
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2020
Volume
99
Issue
7
Pages
598-605
ISSN
  • 0025-7931 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-0356
OpenAlex
W3041774212
Cited by
85
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8
FWCI
6.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Respiration (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (17H04266, 17K16482, 20K08056)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiation Dose and Imaging
Keywords
lung volume, 320-detector row CT, supine versus standing position, total lung capacity, pulmonary function tests, deep inspiration breath hold, right middle lobe, lung volume measurement
MeSH terms
Standing Position, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Lung, Male, Middle Aged, Reference Values, Radiography, Thoracic, Total Lung Capacity, Supine Position, Multidetector Computed Tomography, Healthy Volunteers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review