Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

EM VivasPulmonary oedema

EM Vivas · Pulmonary oedema

Pulmonary oedema — the cardiogenic versus the non-cardiogenic

A clinical viva on the cardiogenic-vs-ARDS distinction and the management.

clinical1 min readVerification in progress

Target exams

ACEMFRCEMABEM
On this page
Study tools

Target exams

ACEMFRCEMABEM
Prompt
Distinguish the cardiogenic from the non-cardiogenic (the ARDS) pulmonary oedema, and describe the management of the cardiogenic.

Interpretation

Reveal interpretationShowHide

The cardiogenic versus the non-cardiogenic — confirm mechanism/fluid/heart/BNP/echo discriminators and cause lists against local respiratory teaching; the held review covers NIV/CPAP in cardiogenic oedema (reduced venous return and LV afterload, lower filling pressure, improved vitals/physiology, less intubation and mortality versus conventional oxygen).[2]

The management of the cardiogenic:

  1. The upright position, the high-flow oxygen — per local protocol.
  2. The CPAP (or BiPAP if hypercapnic) — reduces venous return and LV afterload, improves vitals and physiology, decreases intubation and mortality versus conventional oxygen.[2]
  3. The IV GTN — confirm dose against local protocol.
  4. The IV furosemide — confirm dose against local protocol.
  5. The treat-the-cause (PCI, rate control, valve) — per local protocol.
  6. The high-dependency or the intensive care — per local disposition protocol.

[3]The principles: cardiogenic hydrostatic versus ARDS permeability — CPAP/NIV scope is held-review evidence[2]; vasodilator, diuretic, cause-treatment and ventilation specifics per local protocol. Morphine scope: held systematic review found mostly unfavourable results without a focused RCT — confirm use against local protocol.[3]

Emergency Medicine Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this viva. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the Emergency Medicine fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References2ShowHide
  1. [2]Bello G, De Santis P, Antonelli M Non-invasive ventilation in cardiogenic pulmonary edema. Ann Transl Med, 2018.PMID 30370282
  2. [3]Gil V, Domínguez-Rodríguez A, Masip J, et al. Morphine Use in the Treatment of Acute Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema and Its Effects on Patient Outcome: A Systematic Review Curr Heart Fail Rep, 2019.PMID 31183779
Emergency Medicine Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete Emergency Medicine library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousPulmonary embolism — the diagnostic algorithm and the risk stratificationPulmonary embolismNextRed-flag headache — SNNOOP10 and dangerous causes vivaRed-flag headache approach