We wish to thank Dr. Zhao and Dr. Frerichs1  for acknowledging the clinical importance of the findings of our study.2  We agree with them that the correct implementation and, to a lesser extent, the precise methodology description of the electrical impedance tomography technique and analysis procedures are important for further development and clinical use.

We accept that referring to “ventilated and perfused pixels” as the denominator in the calculation of shunt and dead space areas may be misleading and we should have clarified that the detected lung size was defined by all pixels ventilated and/or perfused. Nonetheless, we reassure Dr. Zhao and Dr. Frerichs that our calculation was performed correctly, and our mistake was a mere typo rather than a methodologic error.

We also agree that the terms “dorsal ventilation” and “dorsal perfusion” are not in agreement with the consensus electrical impedance tomography terminology and definitions,3  as...

You do not currently have access to this content.