4.7 Article

Management of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 65, 期 18, 页码 1976-1997

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.03.540

关键词

echocardiography; endothelin receptor antagonists; hemodynamics; phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors; prostacyclins; pulmonary arterial hypertension

资金

  1. Actelion Bayer
  2. Gilead
  3. United Therapeutics
  4. Actelion
  5. Bayer
  6. National Institutes of Health [R24 HL123767, R01 HL107577]
  7. Actelion Pharmaceuticals
  8. American Board of Internal Medicine
  9. Novartis
  10. DC Devices
  11. AstraZeneca
  12. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
  13. Pulmonary Hypertension Association
  14. American Society of Echocardiography
  15. GlaxoSmithKline
  16. Bristol-Myers Squibb

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is common and may result from a number of disorders, including left heart disease, lung disease, and chronic thromboembolic disease. Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is an uncommon disease characterized by progressive remodeling of the distal pulmonary arteries, resulting in elevated pulmonary vascular resistance and, eventually, in right ventricular failure. Over the past decades, knowledge of the basic pathobiology of PAH and its natural history, prognostic indicators, and therapeutic options has exploded. A thorough evaluation of a patient is critical to correctly characterize the PH. Cardiac studies, including echocardiography and right heart catheterization, are key elements in the assessment. Given the multitude of treatment options currently available for PAH, assessment of risk and response to therapy is critical in long-term management. This review also underscores unique situations, including perioperative management, intensive care unit management, and pregnancy, and highlights the importance of collaborative care of the PAH patient through a multidisciplinary approach. (C) 2015 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

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

4.7
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