z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Myths and Controversies
Author(s) -
E Formento,
M.L. Fatahi Bandpey,
Behrouz Fatahi Bandpey,
Francisco José Esteban Fuentes,
Antonio Martínez Oviedo,
Blanca Mar Envid Lázaro
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
the internet journal of anesthesiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1092-406X
DOI - 10.5580/2c
Subject(s) - medicine , acute respiratory distress , respiratory distress , intensive care medicine , mythology , distress , anesthesia , lung , clinical psychology , philosophy , theology
The term Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), was first introduced by Ashbaugh and Petty more than two decades ago. Since then, our understanding of this clinicopathological entity has increased significantly. However, little therapeutic progress has been achieved and the mortality remains high. ARDS is characterized by diffuse pulmonary microvascular injury resulting in increased permeability and, thus, non-cardiogenic pulmonary edema. Ventilation-perfusion lung studies have demonstrated that the predominant pathogenesis of hypoxemia in ARDS is related to intrapulmonary shunts. Common symptoms include dyspnea, tachypnea, dry cough, retrosternal discomfort, and moderate to severe respiratory distress. In most cases the diagnosis of ARDS is that of exclusion. The mainstay of therapy for this syndrome is the management of the underlying disorder causing it. To date, there are no specific pharmacological interventions of proven value for the treatment of ARDS. Once the potentially treatable sources have been found and their therapy started, the main treatment for ARDS is supportive.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom