AJP - GI Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 259: G245-G251, 1990;
0193-1857/90 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jacob, P.
Right arrow Articles by McLaughlin, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jacob, P.
Right arrow Articles by McLaughlin, B.

AJP - Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology, Vol 259, Issue 2 245-G251, Copyright © 1990 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Determinants of upper esophageal sphincter pressure in dogs

P. Jacob, P. J. Kahrilas, G. Herzon and B. McLaughlin
Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois.

Chronic experiments were done on six dogs fitted with EMG electrodes on pharyngeal and esophageal musculature. Electromyographic activity of the cricopharyngeus was recorded in awake and sedated animals with and without manometric recordings as well as during esophageal distension. Intraluminal upper esophageal sphincter (UES) pressure had two distinct components; active contraction accompanied by cricopharyngeal EMG activity and passive elasticity that persisted in the absence of EMG activity. Between swallows, the cricopharyngeal EMG activity patterns observed were of either tonic activity, no activity, or phasic activity with inspiratory bursts. The activity level was markedly affected by anesthesia, phonating, whining, panting, level of alertness, or changes in head posture. A brisk UES contraction was elicited in response to passage of the manometric assembly and to intraesophageal balloon distension. Persistent EMG augmentation after stationing of the manometric sensor suggested that intraluminal manometry tends to exaggerate resting sphincter pressure. We conclude that electrical activity of the cricopharyngeus, and by inference UES pressure, is markedly affected by many variables that are difficult to control during clinical or experimental determinations of UES pressure.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online