You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 236 No. 8, August 23, 1976 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  CLINICAL NOTES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (16)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Gingival and Dental Complications of Orotracheal Intubation

LT James B. Boice, MC; LCDR Henry F. Krous, MC; CAPT John M. Foley, DC

JAMA. 1976;236(8):957-958.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

WITH increasingly widespread use of endotracheal intubation in neonates, the spectrum of iatrogenic complications enlarges. It includes laryngeal edema and tracheitis,1 subglottic stenosis,2 tracheal stenosis,3 nasal stricture,4 swallowing of the tube,5 laryngotracheobronchitis, mucosal and submucosal necrosis, and hoarseness.6 This report concerns the gingival and dental complications following the use of an orotracheal tube in an immature infant.

Report of a Case

An 850-gm twin boy was born to a 34-year-old gravida 2 para 1 woman. The pregnancy, labor, and delivery were uncomplicated. The infant was in immediate respiratory distress, reflected by a oneminute APGAR score of 1. A chest roentgenogram demonstrated the reticulogranular pattern of idiopathic respiratory distress syndrome. Because of the small diameter of the infant's nares, an orotracheal tube was inserted. The tube, measuring 7 cm in length and 0.3 cm in diameter, was the smallest available in the newborn intensive care . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

USNR; USNR; USN

From the Department of Laboratory Medicine, Naval Regional Medical Center, San Diego, Calif.


Footnotes

The opinions or assertions expressed herein are those of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the Navy Department or the naval service at large.

Reprint requests to Department of Laboratory Medicine, Naval Regional Medical Center, San Diego, CA 92134 (LT Boice).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1976 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.