Use of a VXM can lead to shorter wait times and better outcomes as a listing strategy for sensitized children requiring cardiac transplantation. The VXM allows transplant physicians to risk stratify patients and consider an anticipated positive crossmatch as one additional factor in the risk-benefit analysis inherent to any donor offer. This experience supports use of the VXM as an alternative to prospective crossmatch requirements. One should recognize that other era dependent improvements such as updated criteria for patient and donor selection along with newer therapies and bridging options may have contributed to superior outcomes seen in the more recent cohort of patients treated with the VXM approach.

Between 1990 and 1997 vegetative endocarditis was diagnosed in six neutered cats (three males, three females) aged between 3 and 9 years. Two cats were purebred (one Persian and one Tonkinese), the remaining four being domestic short haired cats. The diagnosis was made using echocardiography (five cases) or at necropsy (one case). Concurrent involvement of the aortic and mitral valve was noted in four cats, the aortic valve alone was affected in one case, and the tricuspid valve in another. A likely microbiological diagnosis was obtained in three cats: a Bartonella species in two cats based on positive blood culture and a Streptococcus species in one cat based on Gram stain of valve lesions at necropsy. In another cat, Gram-positive cocci were demonstrated histologically in tricuspid vegetations. Invariably, cats had signs of congestive heart failure (left-sided in five cats, right-sided in one), and this was the major factor contributing to mortality in four cases. Signs referable to sepsis were prominent in only two patients. Appropriate medical therapy, consisting of antimicrobials and drugs to treat congestive heart failure, resulted in survival for 5 and 11 months, respectively, in two cases. The other cats died within 2 weeks of diagnosis, including two which received aggressive treatment in hospital.

Introduction:Hand held, colorimetric, end-tidal CO2 detector devices are being used to verify correct endotracheal tube (ETT) placement. The accuracy of these devices has been questioned in situations of cardiac arrest. The use of the esophageal detector device (EDD) is an easy alternative for detection of ETT placement, and may be more accurate in situations of cardiac arrest.Hypothesis:The use of the esophageal aspiration device in comparison with a colorimetric end-tidal CO2 detector is more accurate in detecting proper ETT placement and easier to use in the prehospital setting than is the colorimetric end-tidal CO2 detection device.Methods:This was a prospective alternating weeks, 6-month study in a prehospital setting. Participants included all patients older than 18 years who were intubated by the Portsmouth, Virginia Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel from 01 July 1993 through 31 December 1993. The aspiration device used, also known as an esophageal detector device (EDD), was a 60 ml, luer-lock syringe attached to a 15 mm ETT adapter. Its efficacy was compared with an already accepted method of ETT position detection, the colorimetric endtidal CO2 detector. Each device was used on alternating weeks, and correct ETT placement was determined by the receiving emergency department physician using standard techniques. Chi-square analysis and Fisher's Exact test were used to compare parameters, time of device use, and ease of use. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated, and provider preference was assessed using a survey instrument administered following completion of the study.Results:There were 49 patients who met the inclusion criteria, but six were excluded because of situational circumstances rendering use of the device a possible compromise of patient care. Twenty-five patients were in the EDD group, and 18 were in the endtidal CO2 detector group. There was no statistically significant difference detected between groups for the gender ratio, underlying condition, CPR in progress, perceived difficulty of intubation, or percentage of nasotracheal intubation. The EDD was significantly easier to use (p<0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in time required for use of end-tidal CO2 detector device versus the EDD. The sensitivity and specificity for correct tracheal placement using the EDD was 100%, and the sensitivity for correct tracheal placement using the end-tidal CO2 detector device was 78%. Use of the EDD was preferred over use of the end-tidal CO2 detector device by 75% of participating EMS providers. One case of nasotracheal intubation with an ETT placement above the cords raised the question of accuracy of this device in situations where direct visualization is not utilized.Conclusion:The EDD was accurate in all cases of orotracheal intubation, and was easier to use than was end-tidal CO2 detector device. It was preferred by 75% of participating EMS providers. In cases in which the ETT may be above the vocal cords, caution must be used with interpreting the results obtained by use of the EDD.