Action of mifentidine on the secretory response to sham feeding and pentagastrin and on serum gastrin in duodenal ulcer patients

1987 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 555-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Bianchi Porro ◽  
M. Lazzaroni ◽  
B. P. Imbimbo ◽  
O. Sangaletti ◽  
C. Ghirardosi ◽  
...  
1950 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry D. Janowitz ◽  
Franklin Hollander ◽  
David Orringer ◽  
Milton H. Levy ◽  
Asher Winkelstein ◽  
...  

1988 ◽  
Vol 117 (4_Suppl) ◽  
pp. S180-S181
Author(s):  
M. PAWLIKOWSKI ◽  
D. CIEŚLAK ◽  
J. BERNER ◽  
K. RYBIŃSKI ◽  
S.M. WEBB ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

1978 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 441-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Brandsborg ◽  
N. J. Christensen ◽  
H. Galbo ◽  
M. Brandsborg ◽  
N. A. Lovgreen
Keyword(s):  

Gut ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. 899-902 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. G. Korman ◽  
C. Soveny ◽  
J. Hansky

1967 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 633-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. M. Preshaw

In conscious dogs with gastric fistulas the latency of both the gastric acid and pepsin responses to sham feeding was about 6 min. When a background secretion was induced with various closes of hog gastrin, the latency of the acid response to sham feeding was unchanged, but the latency of the pepsin response was shortened. The peak rates of acid and pepsin secretion after sham feeding were not altered by the infusion of gastrin.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document