分享:
分享到微信朋友圈
X
综述
基于CT与MRI评估进展性肺纤维化的研究进展
魏博 王晓东 韩博 尹文静 张皓

Cite this article as WEI B, WANG X D, HAN B, et al. Advances in CT and MRI for the assessment of progressive pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2026, 17(8): 184-189.本文引用格式 魏博, 王晓东, 韩博, 等. 基于CT与MRI评估进展性肺纤维化的研究进展[J]. 磁共振成像, 2026, 17(8): 184-189. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2026.08.021.


[摘要] 间质性肺疾病(interstitial lung disease, ILD)是一类演变模式多样、预后差异显著的疾病。相较自发性缓解或处于稳定期的患者,进展性肺纤维化(progressive pulmonary fibrosis, PPF)患者预后较差,死亡率显著增高。因此,PPF的早期诊断及风险分层已成为当前亟待解决的问题。影像学检查贯穿PPF的全疾病周期,在疾病筛查、动态监测及预后评估中均具有重要作用。高分辨率计算机断层扫描(high-resolution computed tomography, HRCT)是诊疗PPF的基石,且CT技术不断革新。然而,包括光子计数CT(photon-counting computed tomography, PCCT)在内的X线成像技术均需面临电离辐射带来的潜在风险。近年来,磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging, MRI)不断发展,为PPF的无辐射评估提供了多维视觉。本文就HRCT及MRI评估PPF中的研究进展进行综述,探讨当前技术的局限性与未来发展方向,以期为早期诊断、追踪疾病进展及指导临床治疗提供一定帮助。
[Abstract] Interstitial lung disease (ILD) encompasses a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by diverse patterns of evolution and markedly variable prognoses. Compared to patients experiencing spontaneous resolution or disease stabilization, those with progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF) face a significantly poorer prognosis and elevated mortality risk. Consequently, early diagnosis and risk stratification in PPF have emerged as critical unmet clinical needs. Imaging plays an integral role throughout the entire disease trajectory of PPF, contributing substantially to disease screening, longitudinal monitoring, and prognostic assessment. High-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) remains the cornerstone of PPF diagnosis and management, and CT technology continues to undergo iterative advancements. However, X-ray-based imaging modalities, including photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT), are associated with inherent risks of ionizing radiation exposure. In recent years, the rapid evolution of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has enabled parenchymal lung imaging, offering a multi-dimensional perspective for the radiation-free assessment of PPF. This article reviews the research progress of HRCT and MRI in the evaluation of PPF, and discusses current technical limitations and future directions, with the aim of facilitating early diagnosis, tracking disease progression, and guiding clinical management.
[关键词] 进展性肺纤维化;间质性肺疾病;高分辨率计算机断层扫描;磁共振成像
[Keywords] progressive pulmonary fibrosis;interstitial lung disease;high-resolution computed tomography;magnetic resonance imaging

魏博 1, 2   王晓东 1, 2   韩博 1, 2   尹文静 1, 2   张皓 1, 2*  

1 兰州大学第一临床医学院,兰州 730000

2 兰州大学第一医院放射科 甘肃省智能影像医学工程研究中心,兰州 730000

通信作者:张皓,E-mail: zhanghao@lzu.edu.cn

作者贡献声明::魏博、张皓参与研究方案的设计和稿件撰写,参与了论文重要内容的修改;王晓东、韩博、尹文静负责资料收集、整理、分析,均参与了论文重要内容的修改;张皓获得甘肃省重点人才资助项目资助。全体作者都同意发表最后的修改稿,同意对本研究的所有方面负责,确保本研究的准确性和诚信。


基金项目: 甘肃省重点人才资助项目 2025RCXM035
收稿日期:2026-04-21
接受日期:2026-07-12
中图分类号:R814.42  R445.2  R563 
文献标识码:A
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2026.08.021
本文引用格式 魏博, 王晓东, 韩博, 等. 基于CT与MRI评估进展性肺纤维化的研究进展[J]. 磁共振成像, 2026, 17(8): 184-189. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2026.08.021.

0 引言

       间质性肺疾病(interstitial lung disease, ILD)是一组以肺实质炎症和/或纤维化为特征的慢性异质性肺病[1],主要累及肺泡壁、小气道和血管[2],导致患者气体交换受损。其中,特发性肺纤维化(idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, IPF)约占全部ILD的30%[3],是最典型的进展性纤维化类型,确诊后中位生存期仅为3~5年[4]。高发病率及高死亡率使既往研究多聚焦于IPF,但其他类型ILD患者也可呈现与IPF相似的快速进展表型。它们同样导致患者肺功能下降、呼吸困难加重及早期死亡[5]

       2018年,WELLS等[6]首次提出进行性纤维化性间质性肺疾病(progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease, PF-ILD)的概念。PF-ILD是指经规范治疗后24个月内仍出现疾病进展的ILD,其与患者死亡率增高密切相关[7, 8]。但不同临床研究中对于PF-ILD的定义及分类标准并不统一。为统一诊断标准、优化疾病管理策略,2022年ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT联合发布《特发性肺纤维化及成人进行性肺纤维化临床实践指南》[9]提出了进展性肺纤维化(progressive pulmonary fibrosis, PPF)这一术语。2025年Fleischner学会发布的《间质性肺病标准化临床术语共识》中亦明确指出[10],对于进展的纤维化肺病患者应使用PPF作为首选术语。PPF是指已知或未知病因确诊为肺纤维化的ILD患者(IPF除外),在过去一年内,病情变化符合3项进展标准中至少2项:(1)呼吸道症状恶化;(2)用力呼气量百分比(predicted forced vital capacity, FVC%)绝对下降≥5%或一氧化碳弥散量占预计值百分比(predicted diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide, DLCO%)(校正血红蛋白后)绝对下降≥10%;(3)一种或多种疾病进展的影像学证据。随PPF诊断标准的确立,其流行病学特征亦成为研究者的关注重点。多项国内外研究报道,即使在接受规范治疗后,仍有大约13%~50%的ILD患者出现疾病进展,中位生存期仅为3.7年[11, 12, 13]。多项研究的统计数据之间虽存在一定异质性,但共同表明PPF已经构成ILD疾病负担中持续增长且影响预后的核心部分。

       高分辨率计算机断层扫描(high-resolution computed tomography, HRCT)是目前指南推荐的无创评估PPF的核心手段[9],但其存在辐射暴露风险、难以提供功能学信息等局限性。磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging, MRI)凭借无电离辐射和动态图像采集能力的独特优势,近年来已逐步被应用于肺部疾病的诊断[14]。目前,已有部分文献对HRCT、MRI在ILD中的应用进行了初步探讨[15, 16],但针对PPF这一新定义框架下的形态学、功能学及定量评估等多维分析尚缺乏系统总结。因此,本文拟对以上影像学技术在PPF中的应用进行综述,在梳理现有证据的基础上,指出当前研究局限性与未来研究方向,以期为PPF的早期诊断、病情监测及预后评估提供影像学证据。

1 文献检索策略

       本综述遵循系统性文献检索策略,为确保涵盖该领域的高质量研究,优先纳入发表于SCI期刊及中文核心期刊的原创论著、权威指南与共识声明,检索数据库包括PubMed、Web of Science、中国知网(CNKI)及万方数据库,检索时间区间为各数据库建库至2026年5月。文献检索采用主题词与自由词相结合的方式,英文检索式主要为:(“progressive pulmonary fibrosis” OR “PPF” OR “progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease” OR “PF-ILD”)AND (“high-resolution computed tomography” OR “HRCT” OR “quantitative computed tomography” OR “QCT” OR “photon-counting computed tomography” OR “PCCT” OR “magnetic resonance imaging” OR “MRI”);中文检索式主要为:(“进展性肺纤维化”OR“进行性纤维化性间质性肺疾病”OR“间质性肺病”)AND(“高分辨率计算机断层扫描”OR“定量CT”OR“光子计数CT”OR“磁共振成像”)。

       文献纳入标准:(1)研究内容涉及HRCT、QCT、PCCT或MRI在PF-ILD或PPF评估中的应用,涵盖临床验证及综述文献;(2)语种限定为英文或中文。排除标准:(1)会议摘要、社论、信件及无法获取全文的文献;(2)针对基于同一主题的多项研究,仅保留样本量最大、信息最完整或发表期刊影响力更高的版本。检索策略经两名研究者独立执行并交叉核对,通过阅读标题、摘要及通读全文进行筛选,最终纳入符合标准的文献58篇。

2 HRCT在评估PPF中的应用现状

       鉴于HRCT具备高对比度和空间分辨率,可清晰显示肺实质、气道、胸膜及间质性病变的形态特征与分布模式[17, 18],同时检查快捷、安全无创,因此HRCT已成为评估呼吸系统疾病患者的一线影像学检查手段。

2.1 HRCT视觉半定量评估

       根据指南的建议,肺纤维化进展的判断需通过对比基线及随访HRCT图像予以确认。目前,视觉半定量评估通常是将全肺划分为若干评估单元并对各单元内的病变范围进行估算、赋予分值,最终通过加权获得病变积分[19, 20]。此类方法多聚焦于纤维化面积的评估,且肺容积缩小易受邻近肺组织代偿性膨胀的干扰,因而难以准确评估[21, 22]。BERNARDINELLO等[23]研究指出,PPF患者的FVC显著低于非PPF患者(2.11 L vs. 3.64 L,P<0.000 1),DLCO%亦呈现相似趋势(33% vs. 63%,P<0.000 1)。这表明相较于病情稳定的患者,PPF患者的肺功能损害更为严重,发生呼吸衰竭的风险更高。研究还指出,首次行HRCT检查时即存在牵引性支气管扩张的ILD患者,其进展为PPF及早期死亡风险显著升高(OR=6.59,95% CI:1.83~94.1,P=0.016)。这提示牵引性支气管扩张可作为疾病早期进展与预后分层的重要标志。作为指南推荐的首选无创影像学技术,HRCT可直观、快速地对患者全肺纤维化范围进行分级,实现疾病严重程度的纵向监测与量化评估,为预测死亡风险、优化临床决策提供重要依据[24]。其次,基线HRCT有助于识别存在蜂窝影、牵引性支气管扩张或纤维化范围广泛等进展高风险因素的患者,从而提示临床密切随访监测[25]。此外,PCCT的出现有望进一步提升影像学评估的精准性。相较于传统能量积分CT,PCCT的超高分辨率模式能够清晰显示次级肺小叶水平及肺微循环的细微变化[26, 27]。目前虽尚无研究直接探讨PCCT在PPF中的应用,但空间分辨率的提高或有可能突破HRCT在PPF早期监测中的局限性,为PPF的风险分层与治疗决策提供新的影像学依据。

       综上,HRCT视觉评估能够直观判断疾病是否发生进展、识别高危征象,在PPF的诊疗中发挥着重要作用。然而,其目前仍存在若干局限。肺容积缩小虽为疾病进展的征象之一,却难以通过视觉评估进行准确诊断。此外,视觉评估方法目前仍未统一,存在主观性强、可重复性低等固有局限,制约了不同研究间的结果比较。未来,通过前瞻性、比较性研究进一步探索PCCT在PPF中的具体应用,或可弥补上述不足,推动PPF视觉评估朝向更精准、客观的方向发展。

2.2 HRCT定量评估

       定量CT(quantitative computed tomography, QCT)能够提供连续、客观且独立于观察者的测量指标,并具有可重复、可量化等显著优势,有望弥补视觉评估在PPF中的局限性。近年来,QCT经历了从传统直方图分析向深度学习技术的转变,量化评估的准确性得到进一步提升[28]。AHN等[29]通过分析定量ILD(quantitative interstitial lung disease, QILD)与总生存期的关系,确定QILD增加超过4%可明确提示疾病进展(P=0.002),且该指标被证实为患者总生存期的独立预测因子(HR=6.72,P=0.009)。WANG等[30]研究首先表明,肺容积下降、磨玻璃影(ground-glass opacity, GGO)、网状影及蜂窝影的增加与死亡率增高具有显著相关性(P值均<0.001)。据此,研究构建复合定量指标qct PPF,其能够比医师更早、更敏感地检测出影像学的细微进展,且qct PPF阳性患者进展风险更高、肺功能下降速度更快,其死亡或移植风险增加3.41倍(HR=4.41,95% CI:2.77~7.03)。KOH等[31]进一步利用深度学习技术对基线与随访CT图像进行自动分割与量化,探究了肺功能指标与纤维化范围动态变化之间的关系。研究亦证实FVC%下降幅度较大的患者,其CT定量纤维化范围的增幅更为显著(P<0.001)。此外,该研究在校正FVC%绝对下降≥5%后,CT定量的纤维化范围增加(HR=1.844,P=0.01)及总ILD范围增加(HR=2.484,P<0.001)仍为显著预后因素,进一步校正FVC%绝对下降≥10%后,上述QCT指标依然保持独立预测能力(纤维化:HR=2.918,P<0.001;总ILD:HR=3.125,P<0.001)。这表明QCT可在肺功能指标发生显著恶化之前,更早地识别出具有疾病进展风险的患者。

       QCT不仅能够更加客观、准确地识别PPF患者,还能实现风险分层及预后评估[32, 33],但其临床等效阈值仍然需要探索。PARK等[34]研究初步填补了这一空白。该研究以6个月和1年为随访节点,确定了与轻微肺功能下降(FVC%下降5%至10%)相对应的纤维化评分(fibrosis score, FS),并将其定义为最小临床重要差异。研究报道FS在6个月内增加超过1.34%,或在1年内增加超过2.24%,则提示患者出现了具有明确临床意义的病情恶化。这一阈值的确立加强了QCT评估PPF的有效性和临床实用性。此外,QCT在疗效评估中也展现出独特优势。尼达尼布是目前唯一获批用于PPF治疗的抗纤维化药物[35]。BATTAGLIA等[36]研究指出,PPF患者经尼达尼布治疗后,右肺纤维化体积显著缩小[从(5.56±3.08) cm³降至(4.88±2.77)cm3P=0.041],而同期FVC%及DLCO%无显著变化。这表明QCT能够先于肺功能指标检测到尼达尼布带来的早期、细微的肺实质改善,或可作为抗纤维化治疗早期应答的敏感生物标志物。

       总体而言,HRCT凭借其高空间分辨率可实现对肺部异常病变的精准监测,而PCCT的革新与QCT的算法演进亦为PPF的临床评估提供了更多选择。然而,电离辐射始终是HRCT在临床应用中的潜在限制因素。上述局限使得寻求一种无电离辐射的影像学检查手段成为PPF临床管理的迫切需求。未来,可聚焦于MRI的多维度分析,为PPF的早期诊断、长期随访及疗效评估提供新的方向。

3 MRI在评估PPF中的应用现状

       MRI因其无电离辐射,具备多平面、多参数及多序列成像能力而受到广泛关注。MRI不仅能够反映肺组织结构、灌注与通气情况等信息,还有助于区分炎性改变与纤维性病变,为PPF的无辐射监测提供了颇具前景的替代选择[37, 38, 39]。尽管2022年ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT指南[9]已明确了PPF的诊断标准,但目前尚缺乏足够的公开发表数据用于评估PPF患者的MRI指标。鉴于PPF与IPF具有相似的发病机制,且回顾多项临床研究的受试者筛选多基于PF-ILD标准执行[40],因此在本文中仍被采纳为证据支持。

3.1 MRI形态学评估

       传统肺部MRI面临质子密度低、呼吸运动伪影及空气与实质界面磁敏感伪影等限制[41],但随着新脉冲序列的研发以及图像质量优化算法的进步,这些局限正逐步得以克服。超短回波时间(ultrashort echo time, UTE)序列被视为评估肺部异常最具前景的MRI序列之一[42, 43],其能够显著提高图像的信噪比与对比噪声比[44]。LANDINI等[45]研究指出,UTE序列能够清晰显示牵引性支气管扩张、网格影及蜂窝影等结构变化。该团队在后续研究中进一步证实[46],MRI对病变范围的评估与HRCT具有良好一致性,二者的一致性相关系数可达0.95。

       在UTE序列的基础上,三维零回波时间(three-dimensional zero echo time, 3D-ZTE)将回波时间压缩至近乎为零,使其能够更高效地捕获快速衰减的信号且伪影更少。UFUK等[47]研究采用俯卧位扫描,有效降低了GGO的误诊率,进一步提升3D-ZTE识别肺纤维化的特异性。同时,3D-ZTE与CT在评估总纤维化范围(r=0.986)与识别GGO(r=0.945)方面均表现出良好一致性,但对细微网格影和纹理粗糙度的检出能力不及CT。此外,3D-ZTE所评估的纤维化范围与FVC%呈显著负相关(r=-0.387,P=0.003)。

       综合来看,UTE、3D-ZTE序列在肺纤维化检测及范围评估等方面已与HRCT达到高度等效,且其结果可与肺功能参数相互补充。这表明对于需长期随访的PPF患者,上述技术有望在不牺牲图像质量的前提下,提供一种可靠的无辐射监测手段。年轻患者及孕妇等辐射敏感人群亦可从中获益。尽管3D-ZTE在序列设计上有所改进,但对早期、轻度纤维化改变的识别与量化仍是所有超短回波时间技术面临的共同挑战。未来,通过深度学习算法的引入、成像参数的优化,或有望进一步提升MRI在PPF形态学评估中的准确性。

3.2 MRI功能学评估

       相较于形态学评估,MRI的核心优势在于能够提供HRCT无法获取的功能学信息。动态对比增强MRI(dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, DCE-MRI)利用早期强化与延迟强化的模式差异,帮助临床更好地区分炎性和纤维化病灶[48]。同时,DCE-MRI还可通过定量参数揭示肺纤维化区域的血流动力学改变。TORRES等[49]研究利用首次通过时间(first moment transit time, FMTT)、对比剂流入斜率(wash-in slope, SLOPE)及肺血流量(pulmonary blood flow, PBF)等指标,对纤维化区域的血流动力学进行评估。研究表明,在纤维化程度较重的区域,FMTT延长,而PBF和SLOPE降低(P≤0.05)。此外,与稳定组及健康人群相比,进展组的全肺平均FMTT反而缩短(P=0.004),这可能与纤维化区域血管破坏、正常肺组织灌注代偿增加有关。

       超极化¹2⁹Xe MRI(hyperpolarized 129Xe MRI, HP 129Xe MRI)通过吸入¹2⁹Xe作为示踪剂,实现肺通气和气血交换功能的无创评估。HAHN等[50]研究利用空间配准技术将HRCT图像与MRI功能成像相结合,以此探究疾病进展与肺部气体交换障碍之间的关联。研究表明,与稳定组相比,进展组基线时具有高通气百分比[(13±6.1)% vs. (8.2±5.9)%,P=0.03],以及低红细胞-屏障比(0.20±0.06 vs. 0.26±0.06,P=0.03)。此外,进展组中正常肺组织区域的红细胞-屏障比亦出现下降(0.21±0.07 vs. 0.28±0.05;P=0.01)。这表明HP 129Xe MRI不仅能够预测疾病进展风险,并且能够先于形态学改变发现隐匿的肺功能损害,为早期识别疾病进展的高风险患者及指导干预提供了重要依据。

       近年来,相位分辨功能性肺phase-resolved functional lung, PREFUL)及扩散加权成像(diffusion- weighted imaging, DWI)等技术凭借无创、无需造影剂等优势受到关注。PREFUL是依赖呼吸及循环周期中肺部质子信号强度的变化对肺灌注和通气进行评估的技术[51]。OUYANG等[52]研究表明,进展组基线时灌注缺损比例显著升高、健康通气/血流(ventilation/perfusion, V/Q)匹配区域显著减少。研究还指出,由灌注缺损与V/Q指标构建的联合预测模型,其效能显著优于肺功能指标(AUC 0.87 vs. 0.60)。这表明PREFUL技术能够先于肺功能检查发现区域性功能缺陷,并有效预测疾病进展。DWI序列通过探测组织中水分子的微观弥散运动来提供功能信息,已被广泛应用于全身多个部位。但DWI受限于微循环灌注干扰,难以准确反映组织真实的弥散状态。体素内不相干运动(intravoxel incoherent motion, IVIM)通过多b值采集和双指数模型分析,可同时分离出组织纯扩散系数、假扩散系数及灌注分数,从而评估纤维化相关的细胞外基质沉积与微循环灌注改变[53]。目前,IVIM在ILD中的应用尚处于初步探索阶段。未来,IVIM有望通过多参数联合分析为PPF的严重程度评估与随访提供一种无创影像学工具。

       综上所述,MRI功能成像凭借其多参数、多序列的技术优势,能够从通气、灌注及气体交换等多个维度为PPF的精准评估提供影像学信息。此外,功能学成像可在肺实质发生形态学改变之前捕捉肺部异常变化,进一步填补了HRCT在微观生理变化监测中的局限性。然而,目前相关研究普遍存在样本量较小、部分技术对患者配合度要求较高等局限。未来需开展多序列、大样本的前瞻性研究,以验证功能成像在PPF中的普适性与准确性。

3.3 其他MRI评估技术

       在组织特征成像方面,BUZAN等[54]研究首次将T2加权成像(T2-weighted imaging, T2WI)及T2 mapping技术拓展至ILD的肺重塑评估领域。该研究指出,从正常肺组织、GGO、网格影到蜂窝影,T2值呈递增趋势。这表明T2值可反映肺纤维化的严重程度。此外,RUANO等[55]研究发现,进展组基线时ILD区域与正常肺组织的信号强度比高于稳定组(P=0.052),且该比值与FVC%的下降幅度呈显著正相关(r=0.495,P=0.014)。HOCHHEGGER等[56]研究则基于T2WI的BLADE序列,构建了包含ILD病变-脊柱旁肌肉信号强度比的综合评分,该评分能够有效预测疾病进展(AUC=0.86;P=0.04)。以上研究均表明,基于T2WI的定量参数能够区分纤维化类型并预测疾病进展,且在肺纤维化评估中应用较为成熟、序列易于获取。

       在分子影像与诊疗一体化探索方面,相关研究目前尚处于临床前探索阶段。MRI分子成像技术通过设计特异性探针,有望实现对疾病进展的在体、无创监测,为肺纤维化评估提供新的选择。MA等[57]研究报道了三种基于Mn(Ⅱ)的小分子MRI探针,其通过结合赖氨酸残基实现对纤维化病灶的识别与成像,展现了小分子探针在肺纤维化分子诊断中的应用潜力。在此基础上,BAYRAK等[58]将抗纤维化药物尼达尼布负载于黑色素纳米颗粒表面,并通过螯合Fe³⁺赋予其MRI可视化功能。研究表明,该纳米探针能够缩短周围水质子弛豫时间,增强肺实质的MRI信号对比,并且在7.0 T动物扫描仪上实现了对肺组织内药物分布的无创追踪。该研究融合了药物递送与影像导航的双重优势,为肺纤维化进展的诊疗一体化提供了新的思路。MRI分子成像技术发展前景广阔,但其临床应用仍受限于探针安全性、靶向效率及成像灵敏度等核心瓶颈。

       本文总结了HRCT与MRI在评估PPF中的适用范围、优势和不足,详见表1

表1  基于HRCT与MRI评估PPF的技术对比:优势、局限性及临床应用
Tab. 1  Technical comparison of HRCT and MRI in the evaluation of PPF: Advantages, limitations and clinical applications

4 小结与展望

       目前PPF的诊疗面临多维挑战,其核心在于探究危险因素,实现高危患者的早期识别与有效干预,以延缓疾病进展。因此,寻找能够精确诊断、预测疾病进展的评估工具具有重要临床意义。综上,HRCT及MRI的影像技术正在进行从形态描述到功能定量、从视觉判断到智能分析的转变,推动PPF患者的疾病管理迈向个体化与精准化。但目前仍然面临以下挑战:(1)QCT通过量化指标有望更早、更准确地识别出高风险患者,但如何确立具有明确临床意义的定量阈值仍是亟待解决的问题;(2)UTE/ZTE序列与HRCT成像具有高度一致性,但尚未在所有MRI设备上普及;(3)HP 129Xe MRI依赖昂贵的超极化设备和惰性气体供应,目前仅有少数中心具备实施条件;(4)MRI同时采集多个序列时扫描时间较长,而PPF患者耐受性较差,无法长时间平卧或反复屏气,导致检查成功率受限。未来,或可通过简化扫描流程、标准化序列及多中心协作,推动肺部MRI从研究工具转为临床常规检查。此外,以HRCT为形态学基线、联合MRI功能成像的多模态评估策略,或将为PPF的早期识别与动态监测开辟新的路径。

[1]
PARK C, YEO Y, LA WOO A, et al. Korean guidelines for diagnosis and management of interstitial lung diseases[J]. Tuberc Respir Dis, 2025, 88(4): 654-672. DOI: 10.4046/trd.2025.0044.
[2]
CHELALA L, BRIXEY A G, HOBBS S B, et al. Current state of fibrotic interstitial lung disease imaging[J/OL]. Radiology, 2025, 316: e242531 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40590695/. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.242531.
[3]
MAHER T M. Interstitial lung disease: a review[J/OL]. Jama, 2024, 331(19): 1655 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38648021/. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2024.3669.
[4]
WIJSENBEEK M, COTTIN V. Spectrum of fibrotic lung diseases[J]. N Engl J Med, 2020, 383(10): 958-968. DOI: 10.1056/nejmra2005230.
[5]
COTTIN V, WOLLIN L, FISCHER A, et al. Fibrosing interstitial lung diseases: knowns and unknowns[J/OL]. Eur Respir Rev, 2019, 28(151): 180100 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30814139/. DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0100-2018.
[6]
WELLS A U, BROWN K K, FLAHERTY K R, et al. What's in a name That which we call IPF, by any other name would act the same[J/OL]. Eur Respir J, 2018, 51(5): 1800692 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29773608/. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00692-2018.
[7]
BEHR J, SALISBURY M L, WALSH S L F, et al. The role of inflammation and fibrosis in interstitial lung disease treatment decisions[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2024, 210(4): 392-400. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202401-0048PP.
[8]
BUSCHULTE K, KABITZ H J, HAGMEYER L, et al. Disease trajectories in interstitial lung diseases–data from the EXCITING-ILD registry[J/OL]. Respir Res, 2024, 25(1): 113 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38448953/. DOI: 10.1186/s12931-024-02731-3.
[9]
RAGHU G, REMY-JARDIN M, RICHELDI L, et al. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (an update) and progressive pulmonary fibrosis in adults: an official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT clinical practice guideline[J/OL]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2022, 205(9): e18-e47 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35486072/. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202202-0399ST.
[10]
RYERSON C J, BANKIER A, BEASLEY M B, et al. Standardized clinical terms and definitions for interstitial lung disease: a consensus statement from the fleischner society[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2025, 211(10): 1756-1774. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202505-1142SO.
[11]
HAMBLY N, FAROOQI M M, DVORKIN-GHEVA A, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease in a prospective registry[J/OL]. Eur Respir J, 2022, 60(4): 2102571 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35273032/. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02571-2021.
[12]
FLAHERTY K R, WELLS A U, COTTIN V, et al. Nintedanib in progressive interstitial lung diseases: data from the whole INBUILD trial[J/OL]. Eur Respir J, 2022, 59(3): 2004538 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34475231/. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.04538-2020.
[13]
赵铁梅, 刘凯迪, 段智梅, 等. 纤维化性间质性肺疾病预后因素的前瞻性队列研究[J]. 中华老年多器官疾病杂志, 2021, 20(6): 414-418. DOI: 10.11915/j.issn.1671-5403.2021.06.086.
ZHAO T M, LIU K D, DUAN Z M, et al. Prognostic factors for fibrosing interstitial lung diseases: a prospective cohort study[J]. Chin J Mult Organ Dis Elder, 2021, 20(6): 414-418. DOI: 10.11915/j.issn.1671-5403.2021.06.086.
[14]
程宇欣, 陈歆, 管宇, 等. 间质性肺疾病影像学评估研究进展[J]. 放射学实践, 2026, 41(1): 97-101. DOI: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2026.01.016.
CHENG Y X, CHEN X, GUAN Y, et al. Research progress on imaging evaluation of interstitial lung disease[J]. Radiol Practice, 2026, 41(1): 97-101. DOI: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2026.01.016.
[15]
YANAGAWA M, HAN J, WADA N, et al. Advances in concept and imaging of interstitial lung disease[J/OL]. Radiology, 2025, 315(2): e241252 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40358445/. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.241252.
[16]
BRONCANO J, SHIFREN A, ROYUELA J, et al. Role of MRI in interstitial lung diseases[J]. CHEST, 2026, 169(3): 698-709. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2025.09.143.
[17]
RAJAN S K, COTTIN V, DHAR R, et al. Progressive pulmonary fibrosis: an expert group consensus statement[J/OL]. Eur Respir J, 2023, 61(3): 2103187 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36517177/. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.03187-2021.
[18]
LARICI A R, BIEDERER J, CICCHETTI G, et al. ESR Essentials: imaging in fibrotic lung diseases: practice recommendations by the European Society of Thoracic Imaging[J]. Eur Radiol, 2025, 35(4): 2245-2255. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-11054-2.
[19]
BEST A C, MENG J F, LYNCH A M, et al. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: physiologic tests, quantitative CT indexes, and CT visual scores as predictors of mortality[J]. Radiology, 2008, 246(3): 935-940. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2463062200.
[20]
GOH N S, DESAI S R, VEERARAGHAVAN S, et al. Interstitial lung disease in systemic sclerosis: a simple staging system[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2008, 177(11): 1248-1254. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200706-877OC.
[21]
UZUN Ç, ATMAN E D, ÇORUH A G, et al. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and progressive pulmonary fibrosis: correlation between radiological progression criteria and pulmonary function tests[J/OL]. Eur J Radiol, 2026, 195: 112631 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41499910/. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.112631.
[22]
BARATELLA E, BORGHESI A, CALANDRIELLO L, et al. Quantification of progressive pulmonary fibrosis by visual scoring of HRCT images: recommendations from Italian chest radiology experts[J]. La Radiol Med, 2025, 130(6): 965-977. DOI: 10.1007/s11547-025-01985-1.
[23]
BERNARDINELLO N, PEZZUTO F, D'SA L, et al. Predicting biomarkers of progressive pulmonary fibrosis: morphological, cytokine profile, and clinical portrait[J/OL]. Front Immunol, 2025, 16: 1514439 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40612945/. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1514439.
[24]
PUGASHETTI J V, ADEGUNSOYE A, WU Z, et al. Validation of proposed criteria for progressive pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2023, 207(1): 69-76. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202201-0124OC.
[25]
CHO H R, CHUNG M J, CHOI H, et al. Prognostic impact of radiologic and pathologic features on the development of progressive pulmonary fibrosis in patients with interstitial lung disease other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2026, 27(1): 63-75. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2025.0977.
[26]
GAILLANDRE Y, DUHAMEL A, FLOHR T, et al. Ultra-high resolution CT imaging of interstitial lung disease: impact of photon-counting CT in 112 patients[J]. Eur Radiol, 2023, 33(8): 5528-5539. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09616-x.
[27]
VAN BALLAER V, DUBBELDAM A, MUSCOGIURI E, et al. Impact of ultra-high-resolution imaging of the lungs on perceived diagnostic image quality using photon-counting CT[J]. Eur Radiol, 2024, 34(3): 1895-1904. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10174-5.
[28]
LEE K, LEE J H, KOH S Y, et al. Risk factors and prognostic indicators for progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease: a deep learning-based CT quantification approach[J]. Eur Radiol, 2025, 35(12): 8151-8161. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-025-11714-x.
[29]
AHN Y, KIM H C, LEE J K, et al. Usefulness of CT quantification-based assessment in defining progressive pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Acad Radiol, 2024, 31(11): 4696-4708. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2024.05.005.
[30]
WANG J M, ADEGUNSOYE A, PUGASHETTI J V, et al. A quantitative imaging measure of progressive pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2025, 211(10): 1785-1793. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202501-0208OC.
[31]
KOH S Y, LEE J H, PARK H, et al. Value of CT quantification in progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease: a deep learning approach[J]. Eur Radiol, 2024, 34(7): 4195-4205. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10483-9.
[32]
KOSLOW M, BARAGHOSHI D, SWIGRIS J J, et al. One-year change in quantitative computed tomography is associated with meaningful outcomes in fibrotic lung disease[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2025, 211(10): 1775-1784. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202503-0535OC.
[33]
GEORGE P M, RENNISON-JONES C, BENVENUTI G, et al. Evaluation of e-Lung automated quantitative computed tomography biomarkers in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis[J]. ERJ Open Res, 2024, 10(6): 00570-02024. DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00570-2024.
[34]
PARK S, KIM M J, LEE J H, et al. Quantitative CT imaging in progressive pulmonary fibrosis clinical usefulness and meaningful threshold definition[J]. CHEST, 2026, 169(5): 1255-1266. DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2025.11.031.
[35]
VALENZUELA C, COTTIN V. Epidemiology and real-life experience in progressive pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Curr Opin Pulm Med, 2022, 28(5): 407-413. DOI: 10.1097/MCP.0000000000000908.
[36]
BATTAGLIA C, PELAIA C, LUPIA C, et al. Quantification and analysis of lung involvement by artificial intelligence in patients with progressive pulmonary fibrosis treated with nintedanib[J/OL]. Medicina (Kaunas), 2025, 61(9): 1646 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41011037/. DOI: 10.3390/medicina61091646.
[37]
MARINESCU D C, HAGUE C J, MULLER N L, et al. CT honeycombing and traction bronchiectasis extent independently predict survival across fibrotic interstitial lung disease subtypes[J/OL]. Radiology, 2025, 314(2): e241001 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39903073/. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.241001.
[38]
SVERZELLATI N, MILANESE G, RYERSON C J, et al. Interstitial lung abnormalities on unselected abdominal and thoracoabdominal CT scans in 21 118 patients[J/OL]. Radiology, 2024, 313(2): e233374 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39560484/. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.233374.
[39]
DELAMEILLIEURE A, SOMOGYI V, SCHENK S, et al. Identifying outcome domains to establish a core outcome set for progressive pulmonary fibrosis: a scoping review[J/OL]. Eur Respir Rev, 2025, 34(175): 240133 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39843158/. DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0133-2024.
[40]
于娜, 张严, 王玮, 等. 基于进展性肺纤维化诊断标准引发的几点思考[J]. 中国实用内科杂志, 2024, 44(6): 446-451. DOI: 10.19538/j.nk2024060102.
YU N, ZHANG Y, WANG W, et al. Some thoughts based on diagnostic criteria of progressive pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Chin J Pract Intern Med, 2024, 44(6): 446-451. DOI: 10.19538/j.nk2024060102.
[41]
杨腾月, 蒲豆豆, 于楠. 磁共振成像在结缔组织病相关间质性肺病中的应用现状[J]. 磁共振成像, 2025, 16(3): 167-172. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.03.028.
YANG T Y, PU D D, YU N. Current status of magnetic resonance imaging in connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2025, 16(3): 167-172. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2025.03.028.
[42]
LANDINI N. MRI and zero or ultra-short echo-time sequences in secondary interstitial lung diseases: current applicability and future perspectives[J]. Eur Radiol, 2025, 35(6): 2955-2957. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-025-11378-7.
[43]
DOURNES G, WOODS J C. Chronic pediatric lung diseases: counterpoint-a growing role for MRI[J/OL]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2025, 224(6): e2432405 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39629774/. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.24.32405.
[44]
HATABU H, OHNO Y, GEFTER W B, et al. Expanding applications of pulmonary MRI in the clinical evaluation of lung disorders: fleischner society position paper[J]. Radiology, 2020, 297(2): 286-301. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020201138.
[45]
LANDINI N, ORLANDI M, OCCHIPINTI M, et al. Ultrashort echo-time magnetic resonance imaging sequence in the assessment of systemic sclerosis-interstitial lung disease[J]. J Thorac Imaging, 2023, 38(2): 97-103. DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000637.
[46]
LANDINI N, ORLANDI M, CALISTRI L, et al. Advanced and traditional chest MRI sequence for the clinical assessment of systemic sclerosis related interstitial lung disease, compared to CT: disease extent analysis and correlations with pulmonary function tests[J/OL]. Eur J Radiol, 2024, 170: 111239 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38056347/. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111239.
[47]
UFUK F, KURNAZ B, PEKER H, et al. Comparing three-dimensional zero echo time (3D-ZTE) lung MRI and chest CT in the evaluation of systemic sclerosis-related interstitial lung disease[J]. Eur Radiol, 2025, 35(6): 2958-2967. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-11216-2.
[48]
ROMEI C, TURTURICI L, TAVANTI L, et al. The use of chest magnetic resonance imaging in interstitial lung disease: a systematic review[J/OL]. Eur Respir Rev, 2018, 27(150): 180062 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30567932/. DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0062-2018.
[49]
TORRES L A, LEE K E, BARTON G P, et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI for the evaluation of lung perfusion in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis[J/OL]. Eur Respir J, 2022, 60(4): 2102058 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35273033/. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02058-2021.
[50]
HAHN A D, CAREY K J, BARTON G P, et al. Hyperpolarized 129Xe MR spectroscopy in the lung shows 1-year reduced function in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis[J]. Radiology, 2022, 305(3): 688-696. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.211433.
[51]
倪逸飞, 王弘熠, 王建平, 等. 基于相位分辨功能性肺磁共振成像的纤维化间质性肺疾病特征分析[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2026, 34(4): 409-414, 421. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5185.2026.04.009.
NI Y F, WANG H Y, WANG J P, et al. Characteristics of fibrosing interstitial lung diseases on phase-resolved functional lung magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Chin J Med Imaging, 2026, 34(4): 409-414, 421. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5185.2026.04.009.
[52]
OUYANG T, LIU Q M, ZHANG H M, et al. Quantitative phase-resolved functional lung MRI prediction of disease progression in connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease[J/OL]. Radiology, 2026, 319(1): e253337 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42048592/. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.253337.
[53]
JIANG Y L, LI J, ZHANG P F, et al. Staging liver fibrosis with various diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging models[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2024, 30(9): 1164-1176. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v30.i9.1164.
[54]
BUZAN M T, EICHINGER M, KREUTER M, et al. T2 mapping of CT remodelling patterns in interstitial lung disease[J]. Eur Radiol, 2015, 25(11): 3167-3174. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3751-y.
[55]
RUANO C A, MORAES-FONTES M F, BORBA A, et al. Lung magnetic resonance imaging for prediction of progression in patients with nonidiopathic pulmonary fibrosis interstitial lung disease: a pilot study[J]. J Thorac Imaging, 2023, 38(6): 346-357. DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000744.
[56]
HOCHHEGGER B, LONZETTI L, RUBIN A, et al. Chest MRI with CT in the assessment of interstitial lung disease progression in patients with systemic sclerosis[J]. Rheumatology (Oxford), 2022, 61(11): 4420-4426. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac148.
[57]
MA H, ZHOU I Y, CHEN Y I, et al. Tailored chemical reactivity probes for systemic imaging of aldehydes in fibroproliferative diseases[J]. J Am Chem Soc, 2023, 145(38): 20825-20836. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.3c04964.
[58]
BAYRAK E, BAYIR E, BAYSOY E, et al. Nintedanib loaded iron (III) chelated melanin nanoparticles as an MRI-visible antifibrotic drug delivery system[J/OL]. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces, 2025, 252: 114652 [2026-04-20]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40184721/. DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2025.114652.

上一篇 人工智能辅助心脏磁共振影像分析的研究进展
下一篇 MRI在肺癌主要治疗模式疗效评价中的应用进展
  
诚聘英才 | 广告合作 | 免责声明 | 版权声明
联系电话:010-67113815
京ICP备19028836号-2