PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8839592

Does gastric tonometry work? No.

E Benjamin·J M Oropello
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Gastrointestinal tonometry is supposed to diagnose gut mucosal hypoxia using gastric luminal PCO2 and arterial bicarbonatemia, which are substituted in a modified Henderson-Hasselbach equation. This article reviews some of the problems inherent to the multiple assumptions underlying this technique. Tonometry is influenced by several local factors and by systemic acid-base imbalances that are unrelated to oxygenation. Tonometry is a rather crude and cumbersome method of gut capnometry, a technology that may provide valuable information regarding visceral perfusion, but not necessarily oxygenation.

Explore related subjects

BiasBlood Gas Monitoring, TranscutaneousCell HypoxiaCritical CareHumansIntestinal MucosaIschemiaManometryMonitoring, PhysiologicReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Benjamin, J M Oropello. 1996. Does gastric tonometry work? No.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-0704(05)70264-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Assessment of blinding in pharmacotherapy and noninvasive neuromodulation randomized controlled trials for neuropathic pain in adults.

In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), study participants and research personnel are often blinded to minimize biases related to knowing treatment allocation. To determine if blinding was effective, participants may be asked which treatment they believe they received ("treatment guess"). This descriptive review characterized blinding assessment (BA) reporting in pharmacotherapy and neuromodulation neuropathic pain RCTs. Of 288 papers, 36 (12.5%) reported a BA. One paper reported the results of 2 studies, so in total 37 studies with a BA were assessed. Of these, 19 were crossover, 17 parallel, and 1 partial crossover in design. All 37 studies assessed participant blinding, and 10 also assessed investigator blinding. Approximately 27% included an "unsure" answer option for treatment guess, and 38% asked the reason for the guess. There were no clear patterns in BA reporting across time nor based on treatment type. Seventeen trials provided sufficient data to calculate Bang Blinding Index (BI) to determine blinding success. Participants remained blinded (BI = 0 &#xb1; 0.2) in 10/17 placebo and 10/17 treatment arms, 6 placebo and 5 treatment arms had a BI > 0.2 suggesting possible unblinding, whereas 1 placebo and 2 treatment arms had a BI < -0.2 suggesting misinformed guessing. Overall, we found that BAs are done in a minority of published neuropathic pain trials and with variable methodology. Given the importance of minimizing risk of bias because of treatment unblinding, future studies should consider including BAs, and further consensus building is necessary to determine if and how BAs should be conducted and interpreted in analgesic clinical trials.

Bias↗