Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Calculation of a gallbladder ejection fraction: advantage of continuous sincalide infusion over the three-minute infusion method.

Authors: H A, Ziessman; F H, Fahey; D J, Hixson;

Calculation of a gallbladder ejection fraction: advantage of continuous sincalide infusion over the three-minute infusion method.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate alternative methods of infusing sincalide for calculation of a gallbladder ejection fraction (GBEF) during cholescintigraphy (5 mCi 99mTc-mebrofenin). After gallbladder filling, three methods of infusion were compared in 23 normal volunteers: (1) 0.02 microgram/kg as a 3-min infusion, (2) 0.02 microgram/kg as a 30-min infusion, and (3) 0.01 microgram/kg as a 30-min infusion (14 subjects), all performed on separate days. With the 3-min infusion, the emptying pattern was usually exponential and completed in 15 min. The mean (GBEF) was 52% +/- 26% at 20 min and 56% +/- 27% at 30 min (range 0%-100%). GBEFs were less than 35% in six subjects and 35%-38% in four. Side effects were noted by 11/23 subjects. With the slow infusions, emptying was linear; no side effects were noted. With 0.02 microgram/kg, the mean GBEF was 50% +/- 27% at 20 min and 70% +/- 22% at 30 min (range 26%-95%). Similar results were seen with 0.01 microgram/kg, but the data were more limited. The 30-min infusion had a higher normalcy rate than the 3-min method (91% versus 74%). Females had significantly lower GBEFs than males (p less than 0.05%). We conclude that the slow infusion method is preferable; it is more physiological, results in more complete emptying, has no side effects, has less normal variability, and should improve the specificity of this test. The lower mean female GBEF may have pathophysiological significance.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Male, Aniline Compounds, Gallbladder Emptying, Time Factors, Imino Acids, Glycine, Gallbladder, Organotechnetium Compounds, Middle Aged, Sincalide, Reference Values, Humans, Female, Radionuclide Imaging

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    75
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
75
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!