4.5 Article

Pulmonary drug toxicity: Radiologic and pathologic manifestations

期刊

RADIOGRAPHICS
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 1245-1259

出版社

RADIOLOGICAL SOC NORTH AMERICA
DOI: 10.1148/radiographics.20.5.g00se081245

关键词

drugs, toxicity; lung, effects of drugs on; lung, diseases; lung, hemorrhage

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pulmonary drug toxicity is increasingly being diagnosed as a cause of acute and chronic lung disease. Numerous agents including cytotoxic and noncytotoxic drugs have the potential to cause pulmonary toxicity. The clinical and radiologic manifestations of these drugs generally reflect the underlying histopathologic processes and include diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP), bronchiolitis obliterans organizing pneumonia (BOOP), eosinophilic obliterative bronchiolitis, pulmonary hemorrhage, edema, pneumonia, hypertension, or veno-occlusive disease. DAD is a common manifestation of pulmonary drug toxicity and is frequently caused by cytotoxic drugs, especially cyclophosphamide, bleomycin, and carmustine. It manifests radiographically as bilateral hetero- or homogeneous opacities usually in the mid and lower lungs and on high-resolution computed tomographic (CT) scans as scattered or diffuse areas of ground-glass opacity. NSIP occurs most commonly as a manifestation of carmustine toxicity or of toxicity from noncytotoxic drugs such as amidarone. At radiography, it appears as diffuse areas of heterogeneous opacity, whereas early CT scans show diffuse ground-glass opacity and late CT scans show fibrosis in a basal distribution. BOOP, which is commonly caused by bleomycin and cyclophosphamide (as well as gold salts and methotrexate), appears on radiographs as hetero- and homogeneous peripheral opacities in both upper and lower lobes and on CT scans as poorly defined nodular consolidation, centrilobular nodules, and bronchial dilatation. Knowledge of these manifestations and of the drugs most frequently involved can facilitate diagnosis and institution of appropriate treatment.

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

4.5
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