4.1 Review

Pulmonary arterial hypertension and COVID-19: Piecing the puzzle

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE AND RESEARCH
卷 84, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.resmer.2023.101053

关键词

Pulmonary arterial hypertension; COVID-19; PAH-approved therapy; PAH-COVID-19 interaction; Clinical course

向作者/读者索取更多资源

COVID-19 remains a healthcare concern even after the end of the pandemic. Patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) are at higher risk for severe COVID-19 complications. Studies on the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) have produced conflicting results. In this review, we summarize the literature on the clinical presentation of COVID-19 in PAH patients and discuss common pathological aspects and disease mechanisms between PAH and COVID-19. We also provide an overview of PAH-approved therapies and their potential use in COVID-19 treatment, as well as summarize clinical trials on the safety and efficacy of PAH-approved drugs in COVID-19 patients. Finally, we propose future research studies.
COVID-19 remains a health care concern despite the end of the pandemic. Patients with cardiovascular dis-ease (CVD) are at a higher risk for developing severe COVID-19 complications. Studies investigating the COVID-19 clinical characteristics in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients have reported discordant conclusions so far. In this review, we summarize the literature pertaining to the clinical presentation of COVID-19 in patients with PAH. In addition, we discuss common pathological aspects and disease mechanisms between PAH and COVID-19. We present an overview of the different types of PAH-approved therapy and their potential utilization as a treatment in the context of COVID-19. Moreover, we summarize the clinical trials that assessed the safety and efficiency of PAH-approved drugs in COVID-19 patients. Finally, we conclude with proposals for prospective research studies.(c) 2023 SPLF and Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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

4.1
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