Pulmonary edema.

NC Staub - Physiological reviews, 1974 - journals.physiology.org
NC Staub
Physiological reviews, 1974journals.physiology.org
To understand most of what is currently known about the pathophysiology of pulmonary
edema, one really needs to read only two papers. The first is the clear, concise review by
Visscher, Haddy, and Stephens (507); the other is the experimental study by Guyton and
Lindsey (189), which marked the first quantification of the edema process. There are several
reviews and monographs on pulmonary edema available in most scientific libraries. CK
Drinker's book (119) is a classic. I find it impossible to write an intelligent review without …
To understand most of what is currently known about the pathophysiology of pulmonary edema, one really needs to read only two papers. The first is the clear, concise review by Visscher, Haddy, and Stephens (507); the other is the experimental study by Guyton and Lindsey (189), which marked the first quantification of the edema process.
There are several reviews and monographs on pulmonary edema available in most scientific libraries. CK Drinker’s book (119) is a classic. I find it impossible to write an intelligent review without referring to it, not because it is necessarily the best or correct, but because Drinker led the way. Yoffey and Courtice (542) and Ruszny&k, Foldi, and Szabo (418) discuss material relevant to pulmonary edema. Aviado (20) summarized his extensive experimental work on the pharmacologic aspects of pulmonary edema. Luisada (296) has written a monograph on his work and current views.
American Physiological Society