4.6 Review

Perioperative Pulmonary Atelectasis: Part I. Biology and Mechanisms

期刊

ANESTHESIOLOGY
卷 136, 期 1, 页码 181-205

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003943

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (Bethesda, Maryland) [R01 HL121228, UH3 HL140177]
  2. Societe Francaise d'Anesthesie Reanimation (Paris, France)
  3. European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology (Rome, Italy)
  4. Fondation Monahan
  5. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health [R01 HL113022, HL148781]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pulmonary atelectasis is common in the perioperative period and can lead to decreased blood oxygenation, reduced lung compliance, and local tissue biologic responses. Understanding its pathophysiologic mechanisms is crucial for optimal clinical management.
Pulmonary atelectasis is common in the perioperative period. Physiologically, it is produced when collapsing forces derived from positive pleural pressure and surface tension overcome expanding forces from alveolar pressure and parenchymal tethering. Atelectasis impairs blood oxygenation and reduces lung compliance. It is increasingly recognized that it can also induce local tissue biologic responses, such as inflammation, local immune dysfunction, and damage of the alveolar-capillary barrier, with potential loss of lung fluid clearance, increased lung protein permeability, and susceptibility to infection, factors that can initiate or exaggerate lung injury. Mechanical ventilation of a heterogeneously aerated lung (e.g., in the presence of atelectatic lung tissue) involves biomechanical processes that may precipitate further lung damage: concentration of mechanical forces, propagation of gas-liquid interfaces, and remote overdistension. Knowledge of such pathophysiologic mechanisms of atelectasis and their consequences in the healthy and diseased lung should guide optimal clinical management.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据