Chest ACCP Education Calendar
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dayton, L. M.
Right arrow Articles by Weil, J. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dayton, L. M.
Right arrow Articles by Weil, J. V.

Chest, Vol 68, 785-790, Copyright © 1975 by American College of Chest Physicians


ARTICLES

Symptomatic and puomonary response to acute phlebotomy in secondary polycythemia

LM Dayton, RE McCullougy, DJ Scheinhorn and JV Weil

A double-blind study of the effects of phlebotomy was carried out in 18 patients with polycythemia secondary to severe hypoxemic lung disease. Eleven subjects underwent a single phlebotomy of 10 percent of their blood volume, and eight patients serving as controls underwent a sham procedure. Eight of the phlebotomized subjects, but none of the controls, reported subjective clinical improvement (P less than 0.005). Subjects who noted improvement after venesection had higher hematocrit readings than those who did not (P less than 0.02). Symptomatic relief seemed to be most dramatic in those with clinical evidence of congestive heart failure. In contrast to this clear-cut subjective improvement, phlebotomy did not alter objective indices of airway obstruction, lung elastic recoil, pulmonary gas exchange, or exercise tolerance in either the phlebotomized or the control group. Thus, although phlebotomy produced subjective benefit in the majority of patients studied, it was not associated with objective improvement in lung function or exercise tolerance.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1975 by the American College of Chest Physicians.