3324 Harness Creek Rd
Annapolis MD 21403
Medical School: Other - Unknown
Accepts Medicare: No
Participates In eRX: No
Participates In PQRS: No
Participates In EHR: No
License #: D0025678
Request Appointment Information
Awards & Recognitions
Medical Malpractice Cases
Medical Board Sanctions
In vitro characterization of an aortic bioprosthetic valve using Doppler echocardiography and qualitative flow visualization. - Conference proceedings : ... Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual Conference
A 19 mm diameter prototype bioprosthetic valve mounted in a cardiac pulse duplicator was characterized using Doppler echocardiography and qualitative flow visualization at a heart rate of 72 bpm. Analysis of the flow visualization images revealed that the prototype and control valve leaflets open symmetrically but close asymmetrically. The asymmetry in the closing of the valves is likely due to the large pressure gradients across the valves and may have implications for the long term mechanical failure of the valves. The relatively high peak systolic velocity of 309.9 cm/s, which was measured in the prototype 19 mm valve, can be attributed to the small valve diameter and the high cardiac output used in the current study.
A randomized clinical study comparing reduced-volume oral sulfate solution with standard 4-liter sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution as preparation for colonoscopy. - Gastrointestinal endoscopy
Low-volume bowel preparations for colonoscopy improve tolerability.We compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of a new low-volume sulfate solution with a standard 4-L polyethylene glycol electrolyte lavage solution as bowel preparation for colonoscopy.Multicenter, single-blind, randomized, noninferiority study.Five academic and community endoscopy centers in the United States.One hundred thirty-six outpatients undergoing colonoscopy.Patients were randomized to receive 4 L sulfate-free electrolyte lavage solution (SF-ELS) given the night before colonoscopy versus 12 oz oral sulfate solution (OSS) given in equally divided doses the evening before and the morning of colonoscopy.Successful (ie, good or excellent) bowel preparation.Successful bowel preparation was more frequent with OSS than with SF-ELS (98.4% vs 89.6%; P = .04). Excellent preparation also was achieved more frequently with OSS (71.4% vs 34.3%; P < .001). Patients receiving OSS had less residual stool in the cecum and ascending colon and less residual fluid in the cecum and ascending, transverse, and descending colon compared with SF-ELS. The percentage of patients with GI side effects and adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups.The OSS was administered in split doses, whereas the SF-ELS was administered the evening before (which is its FDA-approved regimen).Oral sulfate solution is promising as a safe low-volume preparation for colonoscopy. (NCT00856843.).Copyright 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
A randomized clinical study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a new, reduced-volume, oral sulfate colon-cleansing preparation for colonoscopy. - The American journal of gastroenterology
We sought to evaluate a new, low-volume, oral sulfate solution as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy in adult patients.The investigations were designed as two multicenter, single-blind, randomized, non-inferiority studies to show that the sulfate regimen would effect cleansing that is acceptable and equivalent to polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution with ascorbic acid (PEG-EA), and would be suitable for colonoscopy. One study evaluated same-day administration; the other compared the two study preparations given by split-dose administration in which the first portion was taken the evening before colonoscopy and the second portion on the morning of the procedure. The primary efficacy variable was based on bowel cleansing graded by an investigator who was unaware of the preparation method received.Study 1 randomized 408 outpatients scheduled for colonoscopy for routine indications, with 387 subjects taking the preparation. In all, 364 subjects were randomized and took the preparation in study 2. The demographics of the enrolled subjects were similar across both treatment groups in the two studies, including gender, race, and ethnic characteristics. The primary efficacy analysis supports the conclusion that the oral sulfate solution produces the same degree of cleansing as PEG-EA. Successful preparations were seen in 82.4% and 80.3% in study 1 and 97.2% and 95.6% in study 2 for the oral sulfate solution and the PEG-EA regimen, respectively. Although no difference in excellent preparations was seen in the 1-day preparation, split-dose administration resulted in more excellent preparations in the sulfate group than in the PEG-EA group (63.3 vs. 52.5%, P=0.043). Preparation-related symptoms of cramping, bloating, nausea, and vomiting were generally mild and infrequent. Sulfate subjects reported slightly increased gastrointestinal events and higher vomiting scores (P=0.009) in the 1-day preparation but not in the split-dose regimen. There were no other differences for adverse events or clinically significant laboratory findings, including no increased creatinine.The new 960 -ml oral sulfate solution is effective for colonoscopy cleansing and has an acceptable safety profile.
Map & Directions
3324 Harness Creek Rd Annapolis, MD 21403
821 Bay Ridge Ave Apt A
3442 Rockway Ave