The acid and pepsin responses to increasing doses of i.v. pentagastrin (0.01, 0.02, 0.1, 2.0 and 8.0 μg·kg-1•h-1) were determined by gastric aspiration in 15 male duodenal ulcer (DU) patients and 11 male age-matched healthy controls (C). The lowest dose was infused for 60 min, the doses were then increased every 45 min. The stomach was continuously perfused with saline. Phenol red as marker showed an average loss of 8.4 ± 1.4% in the DU and 10.0 ± 1.4% in the C. Basal acid secretion and the dose-response (DR) curve for acid output (corrected for basal) did not differ for DU and C. The dose (D50) producing half the observed maximal acid response (MR), the calculated MR and calculated D50 was the same in DU and C. Similar results were obtained for pepsin secretion. The ratio of pepsin to acid secretion did not differ for DU and C. It is concluded that the sensitivity of the oxyntic as well as the peptic cells do not differ in DU and C with similar secretory capacity.

Journal Section:
Original Paper
Keywords:
Duodenal ulcer, Gastric acid, Gastric pepsin, Pentagastrin
This content is only available via PDF.
© 1982 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
1982
You do not currently have access to this content.