ArticleScientific reports2024
Differences in lung attenuation gradients between supine and standing positions in healthy participants on conventional/supine and upright computed tomography.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Systematic gravity-induced posterior tumour drift in free-breathing lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Upright multidetector CT with 320-row gantry: a technical innovation providing insights into human anatomy under gravity and potential clinical implications.The British journal of radiology · 2025Article
- GOLD grade-specific characterization of COPD in the COSYCONET multi-center trial: comparison of semiquantitative MRI and quantitative CT.European radiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The effect of gravity on the lungs has been evaluated using computed tomography (CT) in the supine and prone positions but not the standing position. However, as humans spend most of the daytime in the standing position, we aimed to compare lung attenuation gradients between the supine and standing positions, and to assess the correlations between the lung attenuation gradients and participant characteristics, including pulmonary function test results. Overall, 100 healthy participants underwent conventional/supine and upright CT, and lung attenuation gradients were measured. Lung attenuation gradients in anteroposterior direction were greater in the supine position than in standing position (all p values < 0.0001) in both upper lobes at the level of the aortic arch (right: standing/supine, -0.02 ± 0.19/0.53 ± 0.21; left: standing/supine, -0.06 ± 0.20/0.51 ± 0.21); in the right middle (standing/supine, -0.26 ± 0.41/0.53 ± 0.39), left upper (standing/supine, -0.35 ± 0.50/0.66 ± 0.54), and lower lobes at the level of the inferior pulmonary vein (right: standing/supine, -0.22 ± 0.30/0.65 ± 0.41; left: standing/supine, -0.16 ± 0.25/0.73 ± 0.54); and in both lower lobes just above the diaphragm (right: standing/supine, -0.13 ± 0.22/0.52 ± 0.32; left: standing/supine, -0.30 ± 0.57/0.55 ± 0.37). Craniocaudal gradients were greater in the standing position (right: standing/supine, 0.41 ± 0.30/0.00 ± 0.16; left: standing/supine, 0.35 ± 0.30/-0.02 ± 0.16, all p values < 0.0001). No moderate to very high correlations were observed between age, sex, height, weight, body index mass, or pulmonary function test results and each lung attenuation gradient. Lung attenuation gradients in anteroposterior direction, which was observed in the supine position, disappeared in the standing position. However, the craniocaudal lung attenuation gradient, which was not present in the supine position, appeared in the standing position.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.