Over-perfusion, hypoxia and increased pressure cause only hydrostatic pulmonary edema in anesthetized sheep

Circulation Research (Impact Factor: 11.02). 04/1983; 52(3):335-41. DOI: 10.1161/01.RES.52.3.335
Source: PubMed


Overperfusion (high pressure and flow through a restricted microvascular bed) has been suggested as the mechanism for both microembolic and high altitude pulmonary edema. In eighteen anesthetized, ventilated sheep, we measured pulmonary hemodynamics, lung lymph flow, and lymph:plasma protein concentration ratio. After a 2-hour stable baseline, we resected 65% of lung mass (right lung and left upper lobe) and gave whole blood transfusions to maintain cardiac output. During overperfusion of the left lower lobe, lymph flow increased moderately (5.8 +/- 2.3 to 7.7 +/- 3.8 ml/hr) and lymph:plasma protein concentration decreased (0.73 +/- 0.08 to 0.64 +/- 0.08). After a 2-hour stable period, we decreased inspired oxygen in 10 sheep (Pao2 = 40 +/- 3 mm Hg). With added alveolar hypoxia, pulmonary artery pressure increased modestly, but lymph flow and the lymph:plasma protein concentration ratio did not change. In eight sheep (four hypoxic, four normoxic), we raised left atrial pressure approximately 12 cm H2O for 2 hours. Lymph flow rose (10.8 +/- 3.8 ml/h) and lymph:plasma protein concentration decreased further (0.52 +/- 0.07). At each step, lymph:plasma protein concentration decreased, as predicted for the calculated rise in microvascular pressure. There was no evidence that overperfusion, with or without alveolar hypoxia, increased lung endothelial barrier protein permeability.

Download full-text


Available from: Kurt H Albertine, Dec 18, 2013
26 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tesis Univ. Granada. Departamento de Medicina. Leída el 25 de mayo de 2006
  • Source
    Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 02/1982; 384:169-90. DOI:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1982.tb21371.x · 4.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vigorous exercise causes a marked increase in cardiac output with only a minimal increase in measureable pulmonary vascular pressures. These changes in pulmonary hemodynamics should affect lung water and solute movement. On nine occasions, we measured the effect of normoxic exercise on lung lymph flow in four sheep and two goats with chronic lymph fistulas (wt = 15-25 kg). In addition, lymph flow was also measured on five occasions in sheep during exercise at reduced barometric pressures (430 and 380 mmHg). During normobaria, the animals ran at 3-5 km/h with 0-10% elevation of the treadmill for 15 to 85 min. Exercise on average caused a 100% increase in cardiac output, a 140% increase in lung lymph flow, and a slight but significant reduction in lymph to plasma concentration ratio (l/p) for total protein and albumin (mol wt = 70,000). There was a significant linear correlation between lymph flow and cardiac output (r = 0.87, P less than 0.01). There was no change in l/p for IgG (mol wt = 150,000) or IgM (mol wt = 900,000) and no significant change in mean pulmonary arterial (Ppa) or mean left atrial (Pla) pressures. Transition from normobaria to hypobaria caused an increase in Ppa but no change in Pla, cardiac output, or lymph flow. Exercise during hypobaria caused increases in lymph flow that were qualitatively similar to changes observed during normobaric exercise: there was a 60% increase in cardiac output, a 90% increase in lymph flow, and an 11% reduction in l/p for total protein. There was no change in l/p for albumin, IgG, or IgM, and no further change in Ppa. The increased lymph flow during normoxic and hypobaric exercise is best explained by an increase in pulmonary vascular surface area for fluid and protein exchange. Our results suggest that the normal ovine lung has the potential to nearly triple the amount of perfused microvascular surface area. This speculation is relevant to the interpretation of lymph flow data from other experiments.
    Journal of Clinical Investigation 08/1984; 74(1):133-41. DOI:10.1172/JCI111393 · 13.22 Impact Factor
Show more