The Pentax-AWS((R)) rigid indirect video laryngoscope: clinical assessment of performance in 320 cases.

The Pentax-AWS airway scope system is a rigid indirect video laryngoscope with integrated tube guidance. Laryngoscopy and intubation are visualised using a built in LCD monitor which displays the view obtained by a CCD camera mounted in the tip of the laryngoscope. We describe its clinical performance in 320 patients. The Pentax-AWS significantly improved the laryngeal view compared to the Macintosh laryngoscope. Forty-six patients (14%) who were classified as Cormack Lehane glottic view grade 3 or 4 using the Macintosh laryngoscope were classified as grade 1 (45 cases) or 2a (1 case) using the Pentax-AWS airway scope. Laryngeal views measured by percentage of glottic opening score were improved significantly using the Pentax-AWS. Intubation using the Pentax-AWS was successful in all cases, 96% at the first and 4% at the second attempt. The mean (SD) time required to place the tracheal tube was 20 (10) s. The Cormack Lehane grade obtained with the Macintosh blade did not affect the total time to correctly position the tube using the Pentax-AWS. Intubation difficulty scale (score = 0 in 305 patients, score = 1 in 14 and score = 2 in one patient) indicates that tracheal intubation was performed easily in most cases. The Pentax-AWS not only improves the laryngeal view, but its tube guide also facilitates rapid, easy and reliable tracheal intubation under vision. It can be useful in routine anesthesia care and may be advantageous in the situation of unanticipated difficult intubation.

A prospective randomized trial of either famotidine or omeprazole for the prevention of bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection and the healing of endoscopic mucosal resection-induced ulceration.

BACKGROUND: It has been reported that inhibitors of gastric acid secretion prevent bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection for mucosal gastric neoplasm. However, uncertain whether an histamine2-receptor antagonist or proton-pump inhibitor is more effective. AIM: To evaluate prospectively the effectiveness of famotidine or omeprazole for ulcer management after endoscopic mucosal resection. METHODS: From July 2003 to October 2004, 57 patients were randomly assigned to famotidine or omeprazole for the management of endoscopic mucosal resection. Both drugs were given intravenously for the first 2 days, thereafter by mouth. The bleeding rates after endoscopic mucosal resection, the effects on the healing of endoscopic mucosal resection-induced ulceration, and cost-benefits were compared. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients received famotidine and 29 received omeprazole. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in patient characteristics. The bleeding rates after endoscopic mucosal resection were not significantly different (18% vs. 14%) between the groups. Similarly, no differences were seen in the size of the endoscopic mucosal resection-induced ulceration at 1, 30 and 60 days after resection between groups. The total costs of anti-secretory agents demonstrated a significant cost-benefit to those treated with famotidine (10,420 yen vs. 17,782 yen). CONCLUSIONS: Famotidine is suggested as a better alternative to omeprazole for the management of endoscopic mucosal resection, as it showed a clear cost-benefit, and the healing results after endoscopic mucosal resection were similar for the two treatment strategies.