scholarly journals Comparison of Pantoprazole, Omeprazole and Ranitidine in Children Requiring Acid Suppression: A Prospective Pilot Study

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 198-201
Author(s):  
Claire E. Cuttica ◽  
Michael F. Chicella ◽  
Dawn E. Butler ◽  
Ajay Kaul

This study compared the safety and efficacy of enterally administered pantoprazole, omeprazole and ranitidine at raising gastric pH above 4 in children with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Children with gastrostomy tubes that were being treated with one of the three drugs were included. Caregivers were taught to measure gastric pH. Dose, time of last meal, time of last dose, and time of gastric pH were collected. Four weekly pH measurements were compared among the groups. Seventeen patients were enrolled. Six received ranitidine, 6 received omeprazole, and 5 received pantoprazole. Mean doses were: ranitidine 6.8 mg/kg/day, omeprazole 1.4 mg/kg/day and pantoprazole 1.3 mg/kg/day. Mean gastric pH was 3, 4.3, and 4 for the ranitidine, omeprazole and pantoprazole groups, respectively. Twenty-nine percent of pH readings in the ranitidine, 66% in the omeprazole, and 60% in the pantoprazole group were above 4. Comparing pH to time since last dose, ranitidine failed to routinely achieve pH > 4. Pantoprazole and omeprazole achieved this, but by 12 hours after the dose both failed to maintain pH > 4. Pantoprazole and omeprazole appear more effective at controlling gastric pH than ranitidine. Pantoprazole appears safe, however doses of 1–1.5 mg/kg/day once daily may not be effective in maintaining gastric pH > 4 in children with GERD.

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (9) ◽  
pp. 1019-1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martine De Meyer ◽  
Vincent Haufroid ◽  
Nada Kanaan ◽  
Tom Darius ◽  
Antoine Buemi ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nobuyuki Sakurazawa ◽  
Jun-ichiro Harada ◽  
Fumihiko Ando ◽  
Hiroki Arai ◽  
Komei Kuge ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Laparoscopic surgery is widely accepted as minimally invasive surgery; however, obstacles to its functional optimization remain. One such challenge is that each surgical port can accommodate only one instrument at a time. Complex manipulations are therefore necessary to exchange one laparoscopic tool with another during surgery (e.g., removal of forceps and placement of a suction tube), which increases operation times and risk to patients. We developed a new laparoscopic instrument that functions as both forceps and a suction tube, which renders intraoperative tool exchange unnecessary. This prospective pilot study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this novel dual-function device in laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer. Methods This single-center prospective pilot study was undertaken with 15 patients who required laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. To assess patient safety, intraoperative video was used to document any tissue damage associated with the new instrument. To evaluate instrument efficacy, we measured the time interval between the start of bleeding and the start of aspiration (“suction access time”) and compared this time with that of a conventional surgical setup. Results All procedures were successful, and no excess tissue damage occurred during surgery with the suction-tip forceps. Bleeding occurred 158 times. Suction access time was significantly shorter in cases of bleeding when the suction-tip forceps were used (2.01 seconds) than when an ordinary suction tube was used for aspiration (12.5 seconds; P < 0.01). Conclusion These findings suggest that our new suction-tip forceps are a useful, safe, and efficacious operative tool. This surgical innovation may considerably simplify gastric laparoscopic surgery. This pilot study was registered with Japan Clinical Trial Registration on June 22, 2017 (registration number: UMIN000027879).


2015 ◽  
Vol 148 (4) ◽  
pp. S-946
Author(s):  
Maria Marsico ◽  
Tommaso Gabbani ◽  
Samantha Cipressi ◽  
Ivano Bonucci ◽  
Carmine Iermano ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. 101-109
Author(s):  
John Reavey-Cantwell ◽  
Rebecca Dettorre ◽  
Ronald Quisling ◽  
Robert Mericle

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document