Background and Objectives: Nitric oxide (NO) is a ubiquitous intercellular messenger molecule with important cardiovascular, neurological, and immune functions. In addition, it has been postulated that the pharmacological inhibition of NO or its actions may be therapeutically valuable in the disease management. The levels of nitric oxide may provide clues about the severity and the state of the underlying disease process. It could be an inflammatory biomarker that may enable clinicians to direct the environmentally based prevention or treatment programmes and to establish whether NO plays a role in the pathogenesis of periodontitis or not. Hence, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the salivary and the serum levels of NO in generalized chronic and aggressive periodontitis.The Study Design: Unstimulated whole saliva and serum samples were collected from a total of 60 subjects who were in the age group of 18-45 years, who participated in this study. They were divided into three equal groups with 20 subjects in each group; group A (healthy controls), group B (chronic periodontitis) and group C (aggressive periodontitis). The clinical parameters were assessed, based on the oral hygiene index simplified (OHI-S), the gingival index (GI), the probing pocket depth and the clinical attachment loss (CAL). A biochemical analysis was performed to evaluate and compare the salivary and the serum nitric oxide levels of the above groups. Statistical Analysis and Results:The statistical comparisons were done under the Griess Reaction. There were statistically significant salivary and serum levels of NO in the groups of periodontitis (group B and C) as compared to those in the healthy controls (group A). A significant positive correlation was found between the values of the salivary and the serum NO levels in chronic and aggressive periodontitis. Conclusion:Nitric oxide is a potent modulator of the inflammatory disease processes and under pathological conditions, NO has damaging effects. As there is a paucity in the studies which have compared chronic and aggressive periodontitis, this study paved an interest for combining the serum and the salivary analysis in comparing the levels of nitric oxide in chronic and aggressive periodontitis.

No abstract

This system confers advantages, particularly in terms of post-pyloric tube placement, even at this early stage of implementation. A reduction in clinical risk and cost avoidance related to X-ray exposure, the need for endoscopic tube placement and parenteral nutrition have been achieved. The implementation of this system should be considered in other centres.

Background: There is an increased prevalence of coeliac disease (CD) among relatives of those with the disease. Aims: To compare the clinical features in patients with CD detected via family screening with those in patients diagnosed routinely. Methods: Information on screening was provided to relatives of patients. Those who wished to be screened were tested for endomysial and/or tissue transglutaminase antibodies. Duodenal biopsy was performed in those with positive antibodies. The clinical details of the relative screening group were compared with those of 105 patients diagnosed routinely. Results: 183 relatives underwent screening, of whom 32 had positive serology, 24 had histology diagnostic of CD, six had normal biopsies and two declined duodenal biopsy. Patients in the relative screening group were younger with a median age of 33 years (range 17-72 years) compared to the routine group which had a median age of 54 years (range 25-88 years). In the relative screening group, there was a male preponderance (M:F ratio 16:8), anaemia at presentation was significantly less common (13% v 58%; p,0.001) and osteoporosis was less frequent (9% v 22%; p,0.244) compared with the routine group. 65% of the relative screening group had gastrointestinal symptoms or anaemia at diagnosis. Conclusions: Patients detected by family screening are younger with a male preponderance, but fewer had anaemia and osteoporosis.

Background Recent guidelines from NICE have proposed that open access gastroscopy is largely limited to patients with “alarm” symptoms. Aims and methods This study reviewed the outcome of all our patients with verified oesophageal or gastric carcinoma who presented with uncomplicated dyspepsia to see if endoscopic investigation is warranted in this group. All patients with histologically verified upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancers who presented over a period from 1998 to 2002 were identified. Their presenting symptoms, treatment, and outcome were analysed. Results 228 upper GI cancers (119 oesophageal, 109 gastric; mean age 72 years (29–99 years); 130 male, 82 female) were identified in 11 145 endoscopies performed. Only 14 patients (6.2%) presented without alarm symptoms; three patients were under 55 years of age and all had gastric carcinoma—one of these had chronic diarrhoea only. Eleven had dyspepsia or reflux symptoms only, and two were under surveillance for Barrett's oesophagus. Only five patients had a curative surgical resection and are still alive two—six years from diagnosis. A sixth patient had a curative operation but died of a cerebrovascular accident one year later. The remaining eight patients unfortunately had either metastatic disease or comorbidity, which precluded surgery. All of these died within two years of diagnosis, mean survival 10 months. Conclusion Only five patients with dyspepsia and no alarm symptoms had resectable upper GI malignancies over a four year period. Limiting open access gastroscopy to those with alarm features only would “miss” a small number of patients who have curable upper GI malignancy.