PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

John Rawlinson

Publications and source records attributed to John Rawlinson.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Minimizing postcolonoscopy abdominal pain by using CO(2) insufflation: a prospective, randomized, double blind, controlled trial evaluating a new commercially available CO(2) delivery system.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal pain after colonoscopy is a common, distressing symptom resulting from bowel distension by insufflated gas. CO(2), unlike air, is rapidly cleared from the colon by passive absorption. A commercially available CO(2) delivery system has only recently become available. The effects of CO(2) and air insufflation on residual bowel gas and postprocedure pain were compared. METHODS: One hundred patients were randomized to undergo colonoscopy with insufflation of air (n = 51) or CO(2) (n = 49) by means of a regulator; 97 patients completed the study. Patients with active GI bleeding, inflammatory bowel disease, or previous colectomy were excluded. Pain scores (ordinal scale: 0 = none, to 5 = extreme) were recorded immediately after colonoscopy and at 1, 6, and 24 hours. Residual colonic gas was evaluated on abdominal radiographs at 1 hour. RESULTS: Residual colonic gas and postprocedural pain at 1 and 6 hours were significantly less in the CO(2) group. 71% of patients insufflated with room air had colonic distension in excess of 6 cm versus 4% for those in the CO(2) group. 94% of patients insufflated with CO(2) had minimal colonic gas versus 2% in whom air was used (p < 0.0001). Of patients insufflated with air, 45% and 31% had pain at, respectively, 1 hour and 6 hours, versus 7% and 9%, respectively, for those insufflated with CO(2) (respectively, p < 0.0001 and p < O.02). No complications resulted from use of the CO(2) delivery system. CONCLUSIONS: Insufflation of CO(2) rather than air significantly reduces abdominal pain and bowel distension after colonoscopy. CO(2) may be insufflated safely and effectively with the new CO(2) delivery system.

Abdominal Pain↗

Noninvasive verification of nasogastric tube placement using a magnet-tracking system: a pilot study in healthy subjects.

BACKGROUND: Fluoroscopic verification of nasogastric (NG) feeding tube placement is inconvenient and involves radiation exposure. We tested whether the position of an NG tube can be assessed reliably by a recently introduced magnet-tracking system. METHODS: A small permanent magnet was attached at the end of an NG tube and its position was monitored using an external sensor array connected to a computer. NG tube trajectory, spontaneous movements of the magnet, and its position relative to the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and xiphisternum were assessed in 22 healthy subjects and compared with esophageal manometry. In 12 subjects, localization of the magnet was also compared with fluoroscopy. RESULTS: Magnet-tracking displayed NG tube tip movement reproducibly as it moved vertically in the esophagus and then laterally into the stomach. Compared with manometry, the accuracy and sensitivity of magnet tracking for localization of the NG tube tip, above or below the diaphragm, were 100%. Compared with fluoroscopy, the accuracy of NG tube localization by magnet tracking was 100%. With the magnet in the stomach, but not in the esophagus or LES, low amplitude displacements at a frequency of 3 per minute, consistent with gastric slow wave activity, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Magnet tracking allows accurate, real-time, 3-dimensional localization of an NG tube with respect to anatomic landmarks. Recorded motor patterns are indicative of the position of the NG tube. Magnet tracking may be a useful tool for bedside placement of nasogastric and enteral feeding tubes.

Adult↗