JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


First published online April 16, 2009, 10.2967/jnumed.108.059790
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jnumed.108.059790v1
50/5/726    most recent
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 Related articles in JNM
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
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ziessman, H. A.
Right arrow Articles by L.Wahl, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ziessman, H. A.
Right arrow Articles by L.Wahl, R.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 50 No. 5 726-731
© 2009 by Society of Nuclear Medicine

doi: 10.2967/jnumed.108.059790

Clinical Investigation

The Added Diagnostic Value of Liquid Gastric Emptying Compared with Solid Emptying Alone

Harvey A. Ziessman1, Ankit Chander1, John O. Clarke2, Alison Ramos1 and Richard L.Wahl1

1 Division of Nuclear Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland; and 2 Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Harvey A. Ziessman, Johns Hopkins Outpatient Center, 601 N. Caroline St., Suite 3231, Baltimore, MD 21278. E-mail: hziessm1{at}jhmi.edu

The medical literature states that solid gastric-emptying studies are more sensitive for the detection of gastroparesis than are liquid studies; thus, liquid studies are rarely required. However, we have seen patients with normal solid but delayed liquid emptying. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether a study of clear liquid gastric empting has added value for the diagnosis of gastroparesis over a study of solid emptying alone. Methods: A total of 101 patients underwent both solid and liquid gastric-emptying studies, acquired sequentially on the same day. A 30-min (1-min frames) liquid study (300 mL of water with 7.4 MBq [0.2 mCi] of 111In-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid) was followed by a standardized 4-h solid-meal study (a 99mTc-sulfur colloid–labeled egg-substitute sandwich meal). Emptying was quantified as a best-fit exponential emptying rate (T1/2) for liquids and percentage emptying at 4 h for solid empting. Thirty healthy volunteers underwent a study of clear liquid emptying to establish normal values. The results of the liquid and solid studies were compared. 111In liquid downscatter into the subsequent 99mTc solid meal results was analyzed. Results: The upper range of normal for clear liquid emptying (T1/2) for healthy volunteers was 22 min (mean ± 3 SDs) and 19 min (mean ± 2 SDs). Of 101 patients, delayed emptying was found in 36% of liquid and 16% of solid studies. Of all patients with normal solid emptying, 32% had delayed liquid emptying. 111In downscatter into the 99mTc window was not generally significant. Conclusion: For the detection of gastroparesis, a 30-min study of clear liquid gastric-emptying has considerable added diagnostic value over a study of solid emptying alone.

Key Words: gastric emptying • gastroparesis • stomach

COPYRIGHT © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.


Related articles in JNM:

This Month in JNM

JNM 2009 50: 11A-12A. [Full Text]  






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.