Search

Background: Sevoflurane is an inhaled anesthetic agent with ideal properties for achieving deep sedation during pediatric outpatient gastrointestinal endoscopy. This is a comparison of experience with this gas and other sedation methods used in the authors' hospital., Methods: Retrospective chart review and statistical analysis of data from children receiving inhaled sevoflurane administered by an anesthesiologist through laryngeal insufflation, intravenous propofol, or intravenous midazolam-fentanyl-ketamine in any combination to achieve deep sedation for outpatient gastrointestinal endoscopy. Anesthesia was administered in a dedicated procedure room. The intravenous drugs were administered by pediatric intensivists in the intensive care unit. The same endoscopist performed all the procedures., Results: A total of 248 procedures were reviewed (midazolam-fentanyl-ketamine 67, propofol 114, and sevoflurane 67). All patients were adequately sedated with sevoflurane, and no intravenous access was required. Time (in minutes) to awakening (midazolam-fentanyl-ketamine 47.15, propofol 36.12, sevoflurane 5.70), discharge (midazolam-fentanyl-ketamine 141.99, propofol 91.20, sevoflurane 53.34), and total time, including induction and procedure (midazolam-fentanyl-ketamine 163.97, propofol 119.40, sevoflurane 73.93), were significantly lower for sevoflurane (P < 0.01). The complication rate for sevoflurane (4.5%) was lower (P < 0.05) than for midazolam-fentanyl-ketamine (13.4%) and for propofol (17.5%). Charges for room use and medications were also lower for sevoflurane (P < 0.01). The total charges for sedation (U.S.$) were comparable for sevoflurane (688.10) and propofol (723.08) but were higher for midazolam-fentanyl-ketamine (855.10, P < 0.01)., Conclusions: Deep sedation with inhaled sevoflurane for pediatric outpatient gastrointestinal endoscopy is as safe as conventional sedation techniques, potentially less expensive, increases endoscopy unit productivity, and eliminates the inconvenience associated with obtaining intravenous access in children.

Dairy products containing live bacteria that possess lactase activity are used for dietary management of lactose maldigestion. The efficacy of acidophilus milk and the effect of consuming unfermented milk that had been inoculated with yogurt bacteria have not been examined in children. We compared scores for breath H2 excretion and symptoms of 20 lactose-maldigesting children following ingestion of 250 ml of uninoculated milk with two identical milks inoculated with 10(10) cells of Lactobacillus acidophilus or with a commercial yogurt starter culture containing 10(8) cells of Lactobacillus lactis and 10(10) cells of Streptococcus thermophilus. Nine of 10 subjects who were symptomatic following ingestion of uninoculated milk experienced a reduction in symptoms following ingestion of milk inoculated with L. acidophilus, without a decline in H2 excretion. Five of 6 subjects who were symptomatic following uninoculated milk had decreased symptoms and a significant reduction in H2 excretion following milk inoculated with the yogurt culture. For lactose-maldigesting children, milks inoculated with L. acidophilus or with a yogurt culture were associated with decreased symptoms compared with those with uninoculated milk.

Recent studies have shown reduced breath hydrogen (H2) excretion in methane (CH4)-producing healthy individuals following ingestion of lactulose. This questions the reliability of the breath hydrogen test (BHT) in CH4 excretors, but the relationship between CH4 and H2 excretion in other clinical applications of the BHT is not known. We reviewed BHT results in two groups of subjects: (1) 385 children tested for lactose malabsorption in a hospital setting, and (2) 109 lactose-malabsorbing patients tested with a home kit. The percentage of lactose malabsorbers in group 1 (51%) was the same regardless of CH4-producing status (P = 0.97). The BHT data from group 2 showed a positive correlation (r = 0.6, P < 0.000001) between the magnitude of the rise in CH4 and H2 concentrations, and the H2 excretion curves were significantly higher in the CH4-producing individuals. We conclude that attention to CH4-producing status is not necessary in the interpretation of the lactose BHT.

Breath hydrogen testing (BHT) is a simple and reliable method for identifying impaired carbohydrate absorption. We describe a laboratory exercise in physiology for medical students using BHT as the teaching tool. The students collect fasting samples of expired air from each other using a simple nasal prong technique. They then drink one of several different aqueous carbohydrate solutions. Additional samples of expired air are collected by the students at 90 and 120 min after substrate ingestion and are analyzed by gas chromatography. Between sampling periods, discussions of digestive physiology are provided by the faculty. Students tabulate their BHT results as well as recording any symptoms using a standard scoring system. A total of 460 students have participated. We found that the percentage of students who malabsorbed a given substrate was similar each year. The results obtained in these student exercises closely parallel those reported in the literature. We conclude that BHT is an excellent teaching tool for illustrating carbohydrate digestion and absorption, even when performed by minimally trained subjects.

Lactose intolerance is a common condition that can cause nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms. A reliable diagnosis cannot be made on the basis of the patient's history. The breath hydrogen test is simple, noninvasive, accurate, and inexpensive and is the diagnostic method of choice. In addition to traditional dietary restriction of lactose, treatment may consist of alterations in dietary fat content or caloric density to reduce symptoms and use of dairy products or additives that provide lactase activity.

The most important of the genetically determined causes of carbohydrate malabsorption, lactase deficiency, affects the majority of the world's adults. Management of carbohydrate malabsorption consists of temporary or permanent removal of the offending sugar from the patient's diet or providing the sugar in a more digestible form.