Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2009
Gastric emptying of enterally administered liquid meal in conscious rats and during sustained anaesthesia.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Qualls-Creekmore E, Tong M, Holmes G M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Gastric motility studies are frequently conducted with anaesthetized animal models. Some studies on the same animal species have reported differences in vagal control of the stomach that could not be explained solely by slightly different experimental conditions. A possible limitation in the comparison between similar studies relates to the use of different anaesthetic agents. Furthermore, anaesthetic effects may also limit generalizations between mechanistic studies of gastric function and the gastric function of conscious animals. In the present study, we used the [(13)C]-breath test following a liquid mixed-nutrient test meal (Ensure), 1 ml) with the aim to investigate the rate of gastric emptying in animals that were either conscious or anaesthetized with either Inactin or urethane.
METHODS: One week after determining the maximum (13)CO(2) concentration, time to peak [(13)C] recovery and gastric half emptying time in control, conscious rats, we repeated the experiment in the same rats anaesthetized with Inactin or urethane.
KEY RESULTS: Our data show that Inactin anaesthesia prolonged the time to peak [(13)C] recovery but did not significantly reduce the maximum (13)CO(2) concentration nor delay gastric half emptying time. Conversely, urethane anaesthesia resulted in a significant slowing of all parameters of gastric emptying as measured by the maximum (13)CO(2) concentration, time to peak [(13)C] recovery and half emptying time.
CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Our data indicate that Inactin(R) anaesthesia does not significantly affect gastric emptying while urethane anaesthesia profoundly impairs gastric emptying. We suggest that Inactin(R), not urethane, is the more suitable anaesthetic for gastrointestinal research.
METHODS: One week after determining the maximum (13)CO(2) concentration, time to peak [(13)C] recovery and gastric half emptying time in control, conscious rats, we repeated the experiment in the same rats anaesthetized with Inactin or urethane.
KEY RESULTS: Our data show that Inactin anaesthesia prolonged the time to peak [(13)C] recovery but did not significantly reduce the maximum (13)CO(2) concentration nor delay gastric half emptying time. Conversely, urethane anaesthesia resulted in a significant slowing of all parameters of gastric emptying as measured by the maximum (13)CO(2) concentration, time to peak [(13)C] recovery and half emptying time.
CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Our data indicate that Inactin(R) anaesthesia does not significantly affect gastric emptying while urethane anaesthesia profoundly impairs gastric emptying. We suggest that Inactin(R), not urethane, is the more suitable anaesthetic for gastrointestinal research.