The novel video-assisted intubating laryngeal mask Totaltrack compared to the intubating laryngeal mask Fastrach - a controlled randomized manikin study.

BACKGROUND: The novel Totaltrack combines a supraglottic airway device with video laryngoscopic tracheal intubation. The intubation laryngeal mask Fastrach is an established device without visual control of intubation. We hypothesized that supraglottic ventilation success with Totaltrack would be similar to Fastrach, but intubation would be performed faster due to visual control of the procedure. METHODS: Fifty-five anaesthesiologists were randomized into one of two study arms: Fastrach Totaltrack. After a standardized introduction, six consecutive attempts of supraglottic ventilation and intubation attempts with each of one of the devices were performed on an airway manikin. The combined primary outcome was: time to supraglottic ventilation and time to ventilation after intubation. Additionally, success rate and learning curves were evaluated. RESULTS: Supraglottic time to ventilation was shorter when using the Fastrach compared to the Totaltrack (median: 7.8 s [confidence interval [CI]: 7.0-8.6 s] vs. 11 s [CI: 7.8-14.2 s], P < 0.001). Intubation was faster using the Fastrach compared to Totaltrack (median: 12.5 s, [CI: 10.1-14.9 s] vs. 23.3 s [CI: 21.5-25.1 s], P < 0.001). Success rate for supraglottic ventilation was comparable between Fastrach and Totaltrack (86-96%). Successful intubation via the device was 100% in Fastrach and ranged from 61% to 93% in Totaltrack, with a higher probability of successful intubation after four applications. CONCLUSION: In this manikin-based study the novel Totaltrack did not prove superior to Fastrach despite a similar design. Video laryngoscopic control of supraglottic ventilation and endotracheal intubation was prolonged using the Totaltrack. Clinical trials are mandatory to evaluate the role of the Totaltrack in airway management.

Osseointegration of one-piece zirconia implants compared with a titanium implant of identical design: a histomorphometric study in the dog.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate osseointegration of one-piece zirconia vs. titanium implants depending on their insertion depth by histomorphometry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four one-piece implants of identical geometry were inserted on each side of six mongrel dogs: (1) an uncoated zirconia implant, (2) a zirconia implant coated with a calcium-liberating titanium oxide coating, (3) a titanium implant and (4) an experimental implant made of a synthetic material (polyetheretherketone). In a split-mouth manner they were inserted in submerged and non-submerged gingival healing modes. After 4 months, dissected blocks were stained with toluidine blue in order to histologically assess the bone-to-implant contact (BIC) rates and the bone levels (BL) of the implants. RESULTS: All 48 implants were osseointegrated clinically and histologically. Histomorphometrically, BL in the crestal implant part did not differ significantly with regard to material type or healing modality. The submerged coated zirconia implants tended to offer the most stable crestal BL. The histometric results reflected the different healing modes by establishing different BL. The median BIC of the apical implant part of the zirconia and titanium group amounted to 59.2% for uncoated zirconia, 58.3% for coated zirconia, 26.8% for the synthetic material and 41.2% for titanium implants. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this animal study, it is concluded that zirconia implants are capable of establishing close BIC rates similar to what is known from the osseointegration behaviour of titanium implants with the same surface modification and roughness.

Randomised phase II evaluation of irinotecan plus high-dose 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (ILF) vs 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and etoposide (ELF) in untreated metastatic gastric cancer.

An open-label randomised comparison of efficacy and tolerability of irinotecan plus high-dose 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) (ILF) with etoposide plus 5-FU/LV (ELF) in patients with untreated metastatic or locally advanced gastric cancer. One cycle of ILF comprised six once-weekly infusions of irinotecan 80 mg m(-2), LV 500 mg m(-2), 24-h 5-FU 2000 mg m(-2), and ELF comprised three once-daily doses of etoposide 120 mg m(-2), LV 300 mg m(-2), 5-FU 500 mg m(-2). In all, 56 patients received ILF and 58 ELF. Median age was 62 years, Karnofsky performance 90%, and disease status was comparable for both arms. The objective clinical response rates after 14 weeks treatment (primary end point) were 30% for ILF and 17% for ELF (risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-1.13, P = 0.0766). Overall response rates over the entire treatment period for ILF and ELF were 43 and 24%, respectively (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.97; P = 0.0467). For ILF and ELF, respectively, median progression-free survival was 4.5 vs 2.3 months, time to treatment failure was 3.6 vs 2.2 months (P = 0.4542), and overall survival was 10.8 vs 8.3 months (P = 0.2818). Both regimens were well tolerated, the main grade 3/4 toxicities being diarrhoea (18%, ILF) and neutropenia (57%, ELF). The data from this randomised phase II study indicate that ILF provides a better response rate than ELF, and that ILF should be investigated further for the treatment of metastatic gastric cancer.