No offense, but they’re not. The NIH article lists various types of aspiration pneumonia. To quote directly from my textbook, “Robbins Basic Pathology”:
“Although it is commonly assumed that anaerobic bacteria predominate, recent studies implicate aerobes more commonly than anaerobes”.
(Reliability of the source: “Robbins Patholgy” is like the Grey’s Anatomy of pathology. Robbins Basic Pathology is the mildly abridged version.)
(According to my professor, this was just assumed, but there weren’t any studies supporting that assumption.)
I’m not a doctor, but I would think that aspiration pneumonia would be from inhaling a foreign body, and anaerobic pneumonia would occur in the absence of oxygen.
Twist: the myth was the professor believing that to be a myth!
Also, it is indeed possible for contaminants to create a lung abscess with anaerobic conditions within. No idea regarding the frequency of such.
Lastly, not all of the alveolar tree is ventilated at all times, there are non-ventilated parts that do not even get perfusion (Euler-Liljestrand mechanism). Those could also provide a breeding ground for anaerobes.
You’re right about the abscesses, hence my statement, “In reality it takes frequent aspirations over a long period of time to block off an area of the lungs.” However, one aspiration usually won’t cause such a scenario.
The NIH seems to believe that, too:
Does the NIH claim that aspiration causes anaerobic pneumonia? It’s listed as a subtitle, but not in the content.
It’s the same thing.
No offense, but they’re not. The NIH article lists various types of aspiration pneumonia. To quote directly from my textbook, “Robbins Basic Pathology”:
“Although it is commonly assumed that anaerobic bacteria predominate, recent studies implicate aerobes more commonly than anaerobes”.
(Reliability of the source: “Robbins Patholgy” is like the Grey’s Anatomy of pathology. Robbins Basic Pathology is the mildly abridged version.)
(According to my professor, this was just assumed, but there weren’t any studies supporting that assumption.)
I’m not a doctor, but I would think that aspiration pneumonia would be from inhaling a foreign body, and anaerobic pneumonia would occur in the absence of oxygen.
Twist: the myth was the professor believing that to be a myth!
Also, it is indeed possible for contaminants to create a lung abscess with anaerobic conditions within. No idea regarding the frequency of such.
Lastly, not all of the alveolar tree is ventilated at all times, there are non-ventilated parts that do not even get perfusion (Euler-Liljestrand mechanism). Those could also provide a breeding ground for anaerobes.
You’re right about the abscesses, hence my statement, “In reality it takes frequent aspirations over a long period of time to block off an area of the lungs.” However, one aspiration usually won’t cause such a scenario.