Talk:Pulmonary artery

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pulmonary artery article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Anatomy: Gross Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Rendering Bugs

Does anyone else see weird rendering problems on this page? A couple images overlap unless you have really wide browser windows.

Yes, I just noticed this too. Bug needs Fixing

Costal Cartilage

Article, like in the one for the aorta, should mention which costal cartilage it arises from — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.7.80.205 (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Information in the article pulmonary artery pressure would be more suitably covered here. LT90001 (talk) 09:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have completed the merge. Would also like to merge Pulmonary wedge pressure here, as it would improve the quality of the content to have it in one place. LT910001 (talk) 08:47, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would propose the contents of Pulmonary wedge pressure to be suitably copied into this article but I feel the other topic bears the significance of its own name and so that article should be maintained and expanded but not deleted. Diptanshu^Talk 17:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: the pulmonary wedge pressure is used to measure the left atrial pressure (or more accurately, the pulmonary venous pressure), so merging it to the pulmonary artery page would confuse non-expert readers. Measuring the pulmonary wedge pressure is primarily of use in assessing left heart failure, so even if a merge were contemplated, this is not the best place for it. Klbrain (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

With consensus not to merge over the last 3 years, I withdraw this merge proposal. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pulmonary artery occlusion pressure or wedge pressure not the same as pulmonary capillary wedge pressure

The terms PAWP and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP) are used interchangeably and refer to the same measurement obtained from the tip of a PAC following balloon inflation and flotation to the wedged position. As already discussed, PAWP and PAOP are used as indirect estimates of mean LAP. In contrast, the hydrostatic pressure in the pulmonary capillaries is a different pressure that must exceed Left Atrial Pressure (LAP) to maintain antegrade blood flow through the lungs. This pulmonary capillary pressure must not be confused with PAWP or LAP, nor should these terms be used interchangeably. Continued use of the phrase “pulmonary capillary wedge pressure” to mean PAWP or PAOP has perpetuated misconceptions about these measurements. Although the magnitude of the difference between pulmonary capillary pressure and PAWP is generally small, it can increase markedly when resistance to flow in the pulmonary veins is elevated. In most situations, the major component of pulmonary vascular resistance occurs at the precapillary, pulmonary arteriolar level. However, rare conditions like pulmonary veno-occlusive disease may cause a marked increase in postcapillary resistance to flow within the pulmonary veins. A similar situation arises in other conditions that disproportionately increase pulmonary venous resistance, such as central nervous system injury, acute lung injury, hypovolemic shock, endotoxemia, and norepinephrine infusion. Under these conditions, measurement of PAWP will underestimate pulmonary capillary pressure substantially and thereby underestimate the risk of hydrostatic pulmonary edema. Although pulmonary capillary pressure may be measured at the bedside by analyzing the decay in pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) following pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) balloon inflation, these techniques have not been adopted widely in clinical practice. To avoid confusion, the phrase “pulmonary capillary wedge pressure” should be abandoned because it is imprecise and misleading.

http://web.squ.edu.om/med-Lib/MED_CD/E_CDs/anesthesia/site/content/v03/030280r00.HTM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheryldrn (talk • contribs) 16:37, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aneurysms

... can occur in certain disease states doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.012907 JFW | T@lk 22:26, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trunk

3 right pulmonary artery trunk to supply each lobars. While only 2 on the left corresponding to 2 lobars on the left lung. R.Radzi (talk) 02:54, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vague description

it says that the pulmonary artery comes from the right side of the heart, which it does, but that could be confusing for some students as it actually comes from the left atrium although it is on the right side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.128.85 (talk) 10:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Opening of the pulmonary artery into Pulmonary artery

With no objections,

Done --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Derives notability from parent article. More readily covered within pulmonary artery as in 'the artery ends at...'; making reading experience easier for readers Tom (LT) (talk) 23:46, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support for reasons given also is a small stub with little room for expansion.--Iztwoz (talk) 10:44, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 28 December 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 12:38, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pulmonary artery → Pulmonary arteries – It is more common (and logical) to refer to the pulmonary arteries as a group - ie arteries that carry blood without oxygen from the right heart to the lungs - rather than referring to a single pulmonary artery. Changing the title will also mean the article is easier to read because of this. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Per WP:SINGULAR, we should only use plurals that are very nearly universal. This case has too many incoming links that make use of the singular, and too few using the existing plural redirect. The clarity of text of the article is immaterial to this, and can be corrected as needed (ie the article could use plural throughout if that is what's called for in the prose). -- Netoholic @ 15:06, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support only so long as we only discuss them as a group, a complete, limited group whose members are all 100% counted in the article, as per Florida Keys. Red Slash 00:05, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:SINGULAR and Netoholic. The singular form also dominates in book sources. — Amakuru (talk) 12:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.