BACKGROUND: To test safety and efficacy of ORT (oral rehydration therapy), we compared an ORT group with an intravenous infusion (i.v.) group by gastric fluid (volume and pH) obtained by endoscope and gastric ultrasonography examination. METHODS:Twenty six patients scheduled for endoscopic surgery were assigned to an ORT group or an i.v. group by standardized clinical path. After gastric ultrasonography examinations to calculate CSA (cross sectional area) of gastric antrum, general anesthesia was induced. Immediately after anesthesia induction, gastric fluid was obtained by endoscopy, and its volume and pH were measured. RESULTS: Fifteen and eleven patients were assigned to ORT group and iv group, respectively. In ORT group, CSA was median 1.9 cm2 (95% CI:1.8-2.6 cm2), gastric volume was median 11 ml (95% CI: 8-18 ml) and pH was median 3.6 (range: 1.2-8.8), and in i.v. group CSA was median 1.8 cm2 (95% CI: 1.6-2.7 cm2), gastric volume was median 4 ml (95% CI: 3-12 ml), and pH was median 3.1 (range: 1.2-7.2). There was no significance between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS:Gastric volume in ORS group was not smaller compared with that in i.v. group, and there was no significant difference in pH between the groups.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: To test safety and efficacy of ORT (oral rehydration therapy), we compared an ORT group with an intravenous infusion (i.v.) group by gastric fluid (volume and pH) obtained by endoscope and gastric ultrasonography examination. METHODS: Twenty six patients scheduled for endoscopic surgery were assigned to an ORT group or an i.v. group by standardized clinical path. After gastric ultrasonography examinations to calculate CSA (cross sectional area) of gastric antrum, general anesthesia was induced. Immediately after anesthesia induction, gastric fluid was obtained by endoscopy, and its volume and pH were measured. RESULTS: Fifteen and eleven patients were assigned to ORT group and iv group, respectively. In ORT group, CSA was median 1.9 cm2 (95% CI:1.8-2.6 cm2), gastric volume was median 11 ml (95% CI: 8-18 ml) and pH was median 3.6 (range: 1.2-8.8), and in i.v. group CSA was median 1.8 cm2 (95% CI: 1.6-2.7 cm2), gastric volume was median 4 ml (95% CI: 3-12 ml), and pH was median 3.1 (range: 1.2-7.2). There was no significance between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Gastric volume in ORS group was not smaller compared with that in i.v. group, and there was no significant difference in pH between the groups.