Inhaled Flolan Disadvantages

Inhaled Flolan Vs Inhaled Nitric Oxide
Which one is a better option?

Abstract:

Nowadays vasodilators are administered directly via the airway to treat pulmonary hypertension and to recover pulmonary gaseous exchange. Many scientific studies focus on this new therapeutic concept which was initiated by using exogenous nitric oxide (NO) gas. It selectively dilates pulmonary vessels without associated systemic vasodilation. But in recent years alternatives of NO were proposed due to NO’s potential side effects. In quest for the efficient inhaled vasodilator, prostanoids came under observation because of their fewer side effects, lower costs, and greater ease of administration. In his research paper, various case studies are used
It can be used to manage acute right heart dysfunction, hypoxemia, and pulmonary arterial hypertension (Petros, A.J, 1995). Inhaled Flolan is widely getting a reputation of an efficient alternative to nitric oxide in the treatment of severe, refractory hypoxemia or pulmonary hypertension (Walmrath, D., Schneider, T, 1996). Research proves that epoprostenol is equally efficient in treating various respiratory disorders but easier to administer and less costly (Rocca, G.D., Coccia.C,
Flolan at 50 ng/kg/min exerted pulmonary vasodilator effects similar to iNO at 20 ppm, with comparable decreases in mPAP and PVR, while mBP and SVR remained unaltered. But it has to be admitted that despite the fact that nitric oxide is costly and exert some damaging effects but it is more selective on the pulmonary vasculature than Flolan. After considering all the aspects, Flolan is a better option because of it low cost and efficacy in treating PAH in infants (Khan, T.A., Schnickel, G,