Greetings, all. I have a question that I cannot get answered, through research, and conversations with providers ALOT smarter than me--- so I challenge you to give me a satisfactory answer.
Let's say, hypothetically, that I may or may not be be taking a trip to a foreign land with altitudes exceeding 8,000 feet.
One of the main ailments that occur (30% give or take) in poorly acclimated individuals is HAPE, (High-altitude pulmonary edema).
Most texts refer to this as a poorly-understood process that ranges from cough, dyspnea on exertion (poor excercise tolerance) to life-threatening pulmonary edema. There are no specific numbers readily available to me for exactly how many servicemen have been evacuated as a result of this in the last ten years, so I'm going with the worst-case scenario assumption as I prepare for this trip.
In preperation, I have reviewed and considered each treatment that is suggested:
1: Descent ASAP
2: Supplimental oxygen
3: Oral Viagra
4: Oral or IV calcium-channel blockers (contraversial)
What I'm missing is how people describe this "phenomenon" as "poorly understood", because when I run over the physio in my head, it seems to make sense--so I'm going to run my theory by you guys, and my question about the treatment.
First and foremost, reducing the atmospheric pressure on the body (rapid ascent >8k feet) changes the concentration gradient for blood vessels; because PRESSURE is the primary driving force behind concentration gradient in the cardiovascular system. (HACE, anyone?) This applies to alot of stuff, and someone tells me that they understand a certian cardiac disease, but not how it affects pressure, or pressure affects IT, then they don't really understand it.
So the bottom line is, by reducing the outside pressure, you now make the pressure inside the blood vessels the driving force, (particularly the ones that line the aveoli like spider webs)which could trigger a shift of fluid from inside the vessels, to OUTSIDE the vessels and straight into the alveoli. Boom, pulmonary edema.
To compound this, the reduced oxygen concentration in the air causes
pulmonary vasoconstriction. This one is easy, because if you look at all of the diseases that cause hypoxia, you'll also see pulmonary hypertension because the vessels in your lungs will tighten up in response to the drop in oxygen. This will cause all kinds of issues with the right side of your heart, because it has to now fight against a substantial increase in pressure. Conversely, if you INCREASE the oxygen taken in, the pulmonary vessels DILATE, which is why oxygen is extremely effective in treating HAPE.
So what happens if you have a pressure problem, and a container problem? The pressure on the inside of the blood vessels is now greater than the pressure on the outside of the vessels, and thanks to the decreased oxygen in the air, the pulmonary vasculature constricts... which further forces fluid out.
If you look at the treatment outlined, the first two are obvious then, because both will ultimately increase blood oxygen levels, which will dilate the vessels, which will make it easier for fluid to shift from the alveoli itself back into the capillaries. Descent is also great because it fixes the PRESSURE problem.
The next two are drug related, and we know the thinking behind this because both Viagra and CCB's are vasodilators. The approach is the same: If you can't do the first two, then pharmicologically dilate the pulmonary vessels to accomidate this fluid shift and reverse the pulmonary edema.
However... oooh, here comes the big one: I have NOT seen in any text or article, nitrates reccomended for HAPE, DESPITE the fact that nitroglycerin has surpassed furosemide in the first-line treatment for cardiogenic pulmonary edema. True, the mechanism by which nitro treats LV heart failure is different, but what is the difference between drugs like oral Viagra (phosphodiasterase inhibitors), or Diltiazem(Calcium channel blockers) and Nitroglycerin?
The fact that these two drugs work suggest that they both dilate pulmonary vessels. We know that nitro dilates CORONARY vessels, but what effect does it have on pulmonary vessels? If it does indeed dilate pulmonary vessels, then is it unreasonable to use it as an alternative to CCB's or oral viagra for its shorter half-life, ease of administration, and faster onset time?
Please, un-confuse me!