Pancreatic enzymes in human duodenal juice--a comparison of responses in secretin pancreozymin and Lundh Borgstrom tests.

The Lundh test and faecal elastase 1 determination in chronic pancreatitis: A comparative study

“…The test is technically easy to perform and reflects to a greater extent the physiological conditions of the exocrine pancreatic function than the secretin-CCK test [11]. The predictive power of the Lundh test is close to that of the secretin-CCK test [3], but may be lower, especially in patients with only slightly reduced pancreatic function [12], although the opposite has been found [13].…”

A Mixed-Triglyceride Breath Test for Intraluminal Fat Digestive Activity

“…(1) The results of the test in normal subjects and various groups of patients were corre lated with the results obtained in patients with proven organic lesions of the pancreas. (2) The breath test was compared with another independent measure of the fat diges tive capacity of the pancreas: the Lundh test, which has been successfully used to assess pancreatic function [6,16,17,23,27], The results indicate that all patients with proven chronic pancreatic disease or partial or com plete pancreatectomy had a 10-hour cumula tive ,4C 0 2 excretion of less than 51 % of the administered dose, whereas all but 1 of 29 normal subjects excreted more than 53% of the dose. In 1 single normal subject the 14C02 excretion was 48%.…”

Quantitation of Tryptic Responses to Endogenous and Exogenous Stimulation in Chronic Pancreatitis

“…unlike lipase, its activity does not depend on the concentra-tion of bile salts except in so far as bile salts are involved in the activation of trypsinogen by enteropeptidase [ 15], In order to elucidate the reason for the peculiar disproportionate reduction in mean tryptic activity after a test meal compared to peak tryptic activity after an intravenous injection of pancreozymin in patients with chronic pancreatitis [6] -a phe nomenon which also applies to amylase [16] -we have now quantitated the tryptic re sponses to endogenous and exogenous stim uli in controls, as well as in patients with this disease. Studies using a non-absorbable duo denal marker may occasionally lead to over estimation of intestinal volume [2]. Whilst this is easily detectable by using a gastric marker during the test meal -since the calcu lated total recovery of l4C would be well in excess of what was given -it is less easy to detect this problem during an S-P test, even when a gastric marker is simultaneously used because when the tubes are properly sited and pyloric mechanisms are functioning nor mally, the amount of gastric content escaping into the duodenum is usually negligible.…”

“…concentration of PEG 4000. and NC counts were measured in all gastric and duodenal sam ples; in the gastric samples gastric acid and pepsin were also measured, whilst in the duodenal samples tryptic activity was assayed by a pH stat method with p-tolucnc sulphonyl-L-argininc methyl ester as sub strate [2]. The coefficients of variation in these mea surements are < 5 % [2], The steps involved in calcu lating the total outputs of trypsin in duodenal juice during successive periods of both tests have previously been detailed [2. 12, 22], Our objective was to com pare the peak 10-min output of trypsin after intrave nous pancreozymin with the mean 10-min output of trypsin within the 120 min after the test meal.…”