Visualization of alveolar recruitment in a porcine model of unilateral lung lavage using 3He-MRI

BACKGROUND: In the acute respiratory distress syndrome potentially recruitable lung volume is currently discussed. (3)He-magnetic resonance imaging ((3)He-MRI) offers the possibility to visualize alveolar recruitment directly. METHODS: With the approval of the state animal care committee, unilateral lung damage was induced in seven anesthetized pigs by saline lavage of the right lungs. The left lung served as an intraindividual control (healthy lung). Unilateral lung damage was confirmed by conventional proton MRI and spiral-CT scanning. The total aerated lung volume was determined both at a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 0 and 10 mbar from three-dimensionally reconstructed (3)He images, both for healthy and damaged lungs. The fractional increase of aerated volume in damaged and healthy lungs, followed by a PEEP increase from 0 to 10 mbar, was compared. RESULTS: Aerated gas space was visualized with a high spatial resolution in the three-dimensionally reconstructed (3)He-MR images, and aeration defects in the lavaged lung matched the regional distribution of atelectasis in proton MRI. After recruitment and PEEP increase, the aerated volume increased significantly both in healthy lungs from 415 ml [270-445] (median [min-max]) to 481 ml [347-523] and in lavaged lungs from 264 ml [71-424] to 424 ml [129-520]. The fractional increase in lavaged lungs was significantly larger than that in healthy lungs (healthy: 17% [11-38] vs. lavage: 42% [14-90] (P=0.031). CONCLUSION: The (3)He-MRI signal might offer an experimental approach to discriminate atelectatic vs. poor aerated lung areas in a lung damage animal model. Our results confirm the presence of potential recruitable lung volume by either alveolar collapse or alveolar flooding, in accordance with previous reports by computed tomography.

How scientific is the science in ethnopharmacology? Historical perspectives and epistemological problems

This commentary is based on a general concern regarding the low level of self-criticism (-evaluation) in the interpretation of molecular pharmacological data published in ethnopharmacology-related journals. Reports on potentially new lead structures or pharmacological effects of medicinal plant extracts are mushrooming. At the same time, nonsense in bioassays is an increasing phenomenon in herbal medicine research. Only because a dataset is reproducible does not imply that it is meaningful. Currently, there are thousands of claims of pharmacological effects of medicinal plants and natural products. It is argued that claims to knowledge in ethnopharmacology, as in the exact sciences, should be rationally criticized if they have empirical content as it is the case with biochemical and pharmacological analyses. Here the major problem is the misemployment of the concentration-effect paradigm and the overinterpretation of data obtained in vitro. Given the almost exponential increase of scientific papers published it may be the moment to adapt to a falsificationist methodology.