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


     


Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol (August 3, 2006). doi:10.1152/ajpgi.00151.2006
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
292/1/G208    most recent
00151.2006v1
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 de Zwart, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Masclee, A. A.M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by de Zwart, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Masclee, A. A.M.
Submitted on April 6, 2006
Accepted on August 3, 2006

Gastric accommodation and motility are influenced by the barostat device: assessment with Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Ingrid M. de Zwart1, Jeoffrey J.L. Haans2, Paul Verbeek2, Paul H.C. Eilers3, Albert de Roos4, and Ad A.M. Masclee2*

1 Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands; Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
2 Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
3 Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
4 Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: a.a.m.masclee{at}lumc.nl.

Background: The barostat is considered the gold standard for evaluation of proximal gastric motility especially for the accommodation response to a meal. The procedure is invasive because it involves the introduction of an intragastric catheter and bag and is not always well tolerated. Moreover, the barostat bag itself may influence motility. Nowadays Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is able to measure several aspects of gastric motility non-invasively. Aims: To evaluate whether the accommodation response of the stomach, observed with barostat, is present during MRI and whether the barostat interferes with gastric physiology. Materials and Methods: Gastric accommodation, motility and emptying were studied twice in fourteen healthy subjects with MRI using 3D-volume scans and 2D-dynamic scans once in the presence of a barostat bag and once when the barostat bag was not present. Results: Fasting and postprandial intragastric volumes were significantly higher in the experiment with barostat versus without barostat (fasting: 350±132 ml vs. 37±21 ml, p<0.0001, postprandial: 852±126 ml vs. 361±62 ml, p<0.0001). No significant differences were found in gastric emptying (88±41 vs. 97±40 ml/h, NS) and contraction frequency between both experiments. The accommodation response observed in the presence of the barostat bag was not observed in the absence of the barostat bag. Conclusions: The presence of an intragastric barostat bag does not interfere with gastric emptying or motility but the accommodation response measured with the barostat in situ is not observed without the barostat bag in situ. Gastric accommodation is a non-physiological barostat-induced phenomenon.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 1977 by the American Physiological Society.