Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Acute respiratory distress syndrome

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hugheshayne. Peer reviewers: Achram15.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SI Units

[edit]

Hi. Nice article.

For those of us not in the US it'd be really useful if PaO2 and PaCO2 were expressed in kPa as well as mmHg. I'd edit the page myself to add on the SI units but I don't want to tread on anyone's toes. Is there a wikipedia policy about which units to express scientific and medical stuff in?

Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brothersoulshine (talkcontribs) 13:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use of VA or VV ECMO in ARDS Patients

[edit]

Is anyone familiar with literature describing the use of Venous-Arterial or Venous-Venous ECMO in ARDS Patients and successful outcomes in Adults? I'm aware of the success rates in Children, but not so much in adults.

- Chance Gearheart, NREMT-P/EMD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.79.177.254 (talk) 00:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too much detail about PEEP

[edit]

The extended discussion of PEEP should be moved, I think, to the Positive End-Expiratory Pressure article, which is currently a very short stub. Even then, the small details about "ideal PEEP" and related minutiae should be trimmed down. Dratman (talk) 07:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New definition as of 2012

[edit]

[1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a competent person should update this to the Berlin definition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.15.64.50 (talk) 23:47, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neuromuscular blockade

[edit]

doi:10.1186/cc12557 - cisatracurium increases mortality (meta-analysis). JFW | T@lk 16:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Colloids (i.e. albumin) meta-analysis

[edit]

From 3 methodologically weak trials with ~200 patients, doi:10.1186/cc13187 concludes that albumin may improve oxygenation compared to crystalloid, but without a measurable mortality benefit. JFW | T@lk 14:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Double pneumonia

[edit]

There is a redirect from double pneumonia to this article, but it does not mention "double pneumonia". Neither does the article pneumonia. If someone knows the exact meaning of the term "double pneumonia", or its origin, it would be helpful to add it to one or both articles. CuriousEric 17:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfamiliar with this usage. The Pneumonia page has "double pneumonia" under bilateral pneumonia, and cites a 2007 Chest paper which implies that it is a historical term which was used (before?) description of ARDS.

Prior to the development and widespread use of positive-pressure ventilators, acute lung injury (ALI) and ARDS, often termeddouble pneumonia, were nearly universally fatal forms of respiratory failure. However, in 1967 when Ashbaugh and colleagues 1described the clinical entity that they called “acute respiratory distress in adults,” positive-pressure mechanical ventilation was an important component of the care of patients with acute respiratory failure, and it was clear that this therapy was vital to the survival of patients with ARDS.[1]

A PubMed search on the term "double pneumonia" shows absolutely nothing. It sounds like an old colloquial term to describe bilateral chest x-ray findings, and I am not sure value of explaining any of this or even adding "double pneumonia" as a synonymous term on the wiki page. I don't even think it should really be a re-direct. Dr G (talk) 13:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Girard, TD; Bernard, GR (March 2007). "Mechanical ventilation in ARDS: a state-of-the-art review". Chest. 131 (3): 921–9. PMID 17356115.

Intensive Care Medicine

[edit]

Theme issue on ARDS here. JFW | T@lk 16:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lancet seminar

[edit]

doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00578-X JFW | T@lk 08:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now one in NEJM 'coz ARDS is 50: doi:10.1056/NEJMra1608077 JFW | T@lk 16:40, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lancet again: doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00439-6 JFW | T@lk 10:54, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
UK Guidelines: doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2019-000420 JFW | T@lk 15:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HAPE and ARDS

[edit]

Ref says "Autopsy results of a COVID-19 fatality revealed bilateral diffuse alveolar damage associated with pulmonary edema, pro-inflammatory concentrates, and indications of early-phase acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). HAPE itself is initially caused by an increase in pulmonary capillary pressure and induces altered alveolar-capillary permeability via high pulmonary artery hydrostatic pressures that lead to a protein-rich and mildly hemorrhagic edema. It appears that COVID-19 and HAPE both discretely converge on ARDS."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=32226695

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:59, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CDC references coronavirus risk associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome

[edit]

CDC mentions risk of a serious breathing problem called acute respiratory distress syndrome link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/groups-at-higher-risk.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billgdiaz (talkcontribs) 07:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dangling ref

[edit]

Hey all, I have hidden a dangling ref that is not pointing to any source. It is pointing to something called Melmed... anyone know what this is? If so, can we get this added to the sources section, you can then unhide the ref. If you need any help, let me know! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 06:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vibroacoustic Treatment for lungs

[edit]

"Vibroresonance-Recruitment-Manoeuvre" technique could be a game-changer in the treatment of restrictive pulmonary diseases, offering a comprehensive solution for various types of patients while minimizing discomfort and preventing further complications. vibroacoustic effects promote the opening of atelectatic alveoli, which are collapsed or deflated air sacs in the lungs. This approach is intended to prevent atelectasis and maintain the alveoli in an open state, thereby improving lung function in patients with these conditions. The use of vibroacoustic influence is seen as a safer and more effective alternative to traditional Lung Recruitment Manoeuvres that rely on high levels of Positive End Expiratory Pressure (PEEP), which can be risky and cause further lung damage. The divice invented in 2024 helps to  prevent atelectasis and maintain alveoli in an open state without the need for high peak airway pressure, thus reducing the risk of lung injury."Vibroresonance-Recruitment-Manoeuvre" technique, which applies vibrations and resonance within a frequency range of 20 Hz to 300 Hz, is designed to prevent atelectasis and improve lung volume, thus reducing the risk of hypostatic pneumonia and other complications. This method can be used in conjunction with artificial pulmonary ventilation or non-invasive ventilation, tailored to the patient's condition.https://inwhention.blogspot.com/2024/06/what-is-purpose-of-vibroacoustic.html DONNY JOHN JOY (talk) 20:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]