Smallpox: what every otolaryngologist should know.

OBJECTIVE: In light of recent terrorist events and the potential threat of smallpox as a biological agent, we present information concerning smallpox to better inform the otolaryngologist concerning this disease and its prevention. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a review of the smallpox and smallpox vaccination literature over the past 200 years using MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Internet site, World Health Organization Internet site, and references found in previous publications not found in MEDLINE or PREMEDLINE. Our search focused on the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, course, unique manifestations in the head and neck, diagnosis, and treatment of smallpox, as well as the method of smallpox vaccination, vaccination contraindications, and complications. RESULTS: Smallpox is a viral disease with a high mortality rate. Its clinical course, manifestations, and methods of prevention are carefully analyzed in light of otolaryngology practice. CONCLUSION: Smallpox manifestations in the head and neck often presented as acute airway obstruction and also as long-term sequelae such as ectropion, nasal vestibular stenosis, conductive hearing loss, and blindness. Most chronic sequelae involve the head and neck. Smallpox vaccination is effective but not without potential serious risks.     

Popular snore aids: do they work?

OBJECTIVE: The study goal was to critically evaluate 3 popular noninvasive treatments for snoring: an oral spray lubricant applied before bedtime, a nasal strip designed to maintain nasal valve patency, and a head-positioning pillow. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized blinded clinical trial of 3 popular noninvasive snore aids using objective acoustic snoring analysis and subjective patient and bed-partner questionnaires in 40 snoring patients. A digital recorder allowed snoring analysis with data collected in the home environment over 1 week. RESULTS: There is neither objective nor subjective benefit to the use of tested popular noninvasive snore aids. Palatal snoring, palatal loudness, average loudness of snoring, averaged palatal flutter frequency, and respiratory disturbance index did not significantly change when comparing the 3 snoring aids with no treatment. Subjective comments and complications are reviewed as well. CONCLUSION: This is the first prospective comparison trial of popular noninvasive snoring aids. There is no significant objective or subjective snoring improvement in the anti-snoring aids studied compared with the use of no aid. SIGNIFICANCE: Outcome studies aid in verifying or refuting claims made by popular noninvasive snore aids.     

Surgical epicardial left ventricular lead versus coronary sinus lead placement in biventricular pacing.

OBJECTIVE: Biventricular pacing has demonstrated improvement in cardiac function in treating congestive heart failure (CHF). Two different operative strategies (coronary sinus vs. epicardial stimulation) for left ventricular (LV) pacing were compared. METHODS: Since April 1999, a total of 86 patients (pts, age: 63+/-10 years) with depressed systolic LV function (mean ejection fraction 24+/-9%), left bundle-branch-block (mean QRS 182+/-22 ms) and congestive heart failure NYHA III or higher were enrolled. For biventricular stimulation coronary sinus (CS) leads were placed in 79 pts. Nine of these devices were converted to surgical epicardial LV-leads, because of CS-lead failure. In 7 patients epicardial LV-leads were initially implanted surgically, accounting for a total of 16 pts with surgical placed epicardial steroid-eluting LV-leads. For these, a limited left-lateral thoracotomy (7+/-4 cm) was used. Thirty-three (38%) pts had an indication for a defibrillator. The mean follow-up time was 16.4+/-15.4 months (0.1-45 months), representing 107.1 patient-years. RESULTS: In the biventricular pacing mode, QRS duration decreased to 143+/-16 ms (P<0.001). Threshold capture of the CS-leads increased significantly compared to surgically placed epicardial leads (18 month control: 2.2+/-1.4V/0.5 ms vs. 0.7+/-0.3V/0.5 ms), which had no increase in threshold (P<0.001). At the 18 month follow-up 7 CS-leads had a threshold of >4V/0.5 ms vs. epicardial leads which were under 1.1V/0.5 ms, except for one (1.8V/0.5 ms). After CS-lead implantation 25 LV-lead related complications occurred, (failed implantation, CS-dissection, loss of pacing capture, diaphragm stimulation or lead dislodgment), vs. one dislodgement after surgical epicardial lead placement (P<0.05). Correct lead positioning (obtuse marginal branch area) was achieved in all surgical epicardial placements but only in 70% with CS-leads (P<0.03). In the follow up period, 9 pts died (4 cardiac related). Heart transplantation was necessary in 4 pts due to deterioration of the cardiomyopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical epicardial lead placement revealed excellent long-term results and a lower LV-related complication rate compared to CS-leads. Although, the approach via limited thoracotomy for biventricular pacing is associated with 'more surgery', it is a safe and reliable technique and should be considered as an equal alternative.