European Journal of Nuclear Medicine

, Volume 22, Issue 10, pp 1123–1128 | Cite as

Gastric emptying of two radiolabelled antacids with simultaneous monitoring of gastric pH

  • J. Monés
  • I. Carrio
  • S. Sainz
  • L. Berná
  • P. Clavé
  • M. Liszkay
  • M. Roca
  • F. Vilardell
Original Article


The aim of this study was to assess the gastric emptying rate of two antacids using an scintigraphic technique and simultaneous monitoring of gastric pH in 16 healthy male volunteers. Ten ml of Talcid (hydrotalcite 1 g) and Maalox (Mg-Al-hydroxide), with a similar neutralization capacity, were labelled with technetium-99m using a pyrophosphate bridge. Labelled antacids were given on separate days (within 2 weeks), 1 h after a standard meal. Intragastric pH was measured for at least 4 h, using ambulatory pH-metry with a dual-crystant antimony catheter. Continuous monitoring was started 1 h prior to the meal (baseline) and lasted 3 h (post-prandial, post-antacid and final periods). The antacid capacity of labelled and unlabelled antacids was similar. The mean percentages of antacids retained in the stomach fitted a linear model. The mean half-emptying time of Talcid was 63.9±27.9 min, while that of Maalox was 57.3±23.9 min (P=NS). The recordings of gastric pH (mean values of pH for each period) showed a similar profile for both antacids. The mean pH (Maalox vs Talcid) was 1.69 vs 2.07 in the baseline period, 1.95 vs 1.93 in the post-prandial period, 1.79 vs 1.15 in the post-antacid period (P=NS) and 0.4 vs 0.52 in the final period (P<0.05 vs prior periods). In conclusion, the gastric emptying of Talcid and Maalox was similar and pH profiles were parallel and remained unchanged for the two antacids within the first hour of intake. A significant decrease in pH was observed 1 h after intake of the antacids, suggesting a possible rebound effect.

Key words

Gastric emptying Antacids 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Peterson WL, Sturdevant RA, Frankl HD, Richardson CT, Isenberg JI, Elashoff JD. Healing of duodenal ulcer with an antacid regimen.N Engl J Med 1977; 297: 341–345.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Englert E Jr, Freston JW, Graham DY, etal. Cimetidine, antacid and hospitalization in the treatment of benign gastric ulcer. A multicentre double-blind study.Gastroenterology 1978; 74: 416–425.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ippoliti AF, Sturdevant RA, Isenberg JL, etal. Cimetidine vesus intensive antacid therapy for duodenal ulcer: a multicenter trial.Gastroenterology 1978; 74: 393–395.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fedeli G, Anti M, Rapaccini GL, de Vitis I, Cicello IM. A controlled study comparing cimetidine treatment to an intensive regimen in the therapy of uncomplicated duodenal ulcer.Dig Dis Sci 1979; 24: 758–762.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bianchi Porto G, Parente F, Lazzaroni M, Barni S, Panza E. Medium-dose antacids vesus cimetidine in the short term treatment of duodenal ulcer.J Clin Gastroenterol 1986; 8: 141–145.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Becker U, Lindorff K, Andersen C, Ranlov PJ. Antacid treatment of duodenal ulcer.Acta Ned Scand 1987, 221: 95–101.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rydning A, Weberg R, Lange O, Berstad A. Healing of benign gastric ulcer with low-dose antacids and fiber diet.Gastroenterology 1986; 91: 55–61.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Isenberg JL, Peterson WL, Elashoff JD, etal. Healing of benign gastric ulcer with low-dose antacid or cimetidine: a double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trial.N Engl J Med 1983; 308: 1319–1324.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nauert C, Caspary WE Duodenal ulcer therapy with low-dose antacids: a multicenter trial.J Clin Gastroenterol 1991; 13 Suppl l: 5149–5154.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar N, Vij JC, Karol A, Anaud BS. Controlled therapeutic trial to determine the optimum dose of antacids in duodenal ulcer.Gut 1984: 25: 1199–1202.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lux G, Hentschel H, Rohner HG, etal. Treatment of duodenal ulcer with low-dose antacids.Scand J Gastroenterol 1986; 21: 1063–1068.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weberg R, Aubert E, Dahlberg O, Dybdahl J, Ellekjaer E, Farup PG. Low-dose antacid or cimetidine for duodenal ulcer?Gastroenterology 1988; 95: 1465–1469.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zaterka S, Cordeiro F, Lyra LG, etal. Very low-dose antacid in treatment of duodenal ulcer: comparison with cimetidine.Dig Dis Sci 1991; 36: 1377–1383.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holtermüller KH, Liszkay M, Bernard I, Haase W and Talcivent Study Group. Therapy of benign gastric ulcer with low dose antacid hydrotalcite vs ranitidine. Results of a doubleblind, randomized multicenter trial.Z Gstroenterol 1992; 30: 717–721.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Preclik G, Stange EE, Gerber K, Fetzer G, Horn H, Ditschuneit H. Stimulation of mucosal prostaglandin synthesis in human stomach and duodenum by antacid treatment.Gut 1989; 30: 148–151.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Preclik G, Stange EE, Gerber K, Fetzer G, Horn H, Schneider A, Ditschuneit H. Effect of antacid treatment on endogenous prostaglandin synthesis in human antral and duodenal mocosa.Dig Dis Sci 1989; 34: 1860–1864.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    omschke W, Hagel J, Ruppin H, Kaduk B. Antacids and gastric mucosal protection.Scand J Gastroenterol 1986; 21 Suppl 125: 144–149.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hollander D, Tarnawski A. Are antacids cytoprotective?Gut 1989; 30: 145–147.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sewing KFR. Efficacy of low-dose antacids in the treatment of peptic ulcers: pharmacological explanation?J Clin Gastroenterol 1991; 13 Suppl 1: S134-S138.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weberg R, Berstad K, Berstad A. Acte effects of antacids on gastric juice components in duodenal ulcer patients.Eur J Clin Invest 1990; 20: 511–515.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Konturek SJ, Brzozowski T, Drozdowicz D, Dembinski A, Nauert C. Healing of chronic gastroduodenal ulcerations by antacids. Role of Prostaglandins and epidermal growth factor.Dig Dis Sci 1990; 35: 1121–1129.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Halter F. Antacids.Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1992; 4: 947–983.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tarnawski A, Stachura J, Krause WJ, Douglass T, Gergely H. Quality of gastric ulcer healing: a new emerging concept.J Clin Gastroenterol 1991; 13 Suppl 1: S42-S47.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Holtermüller KH, Köning U. Safety of antacids. In: Bianchi Porto G, Richardson CT, eds.Antacids in peptic ulcer disease. State of the art. New York: Raven Press; 1988: 41–52.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roca M, Carrio I, Monés J, Mora J, Estorch M, BernA L. Labelling procedure of antacid preparations using99m-Tc-pyro-phosphate.Int J Pharmacol 1991; 69: 189–192.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Monés J, Carrio I, Roca M, etal. Gastric emptying of two radiolabelled antacids.Gut 1991; 32: 147–150.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weberg R, Berstad A, Osnes M. Comparison of low-dose antacids, cimetidine, and placebo on 24-hour intragastric acidity in healthy volunteers.Dig Dis Sci 1992; 37: 1810–1814.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Calabuig R, Carrio I, Monés J, Puig J, Vilardell F. Gastric emptying after truncal vagotomy and pyloroplasty.Scand J Gastroenterol 1988; 23: 659–664.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Carrio I, Estorch M, Serra-Grima R, etal. Gastric emptying in marathon runners.Gut 1989; 30: 502–503.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Monés J, Carrio I, Calabuig R, etal. Influence of the menstrual cycle and menopause on the gastric emptying rate of solids in female volunteers.Eur J Nucl Med 1993; 20: 600–602.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bennet CE, Hardy JG, Wilson CG. The influence of posture on the gastric emptying of antacids.Int J Pharm 1984; 21: 341–347.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    May HA, Wilson CG, Hardy JG. Monitoring radiolabelled antacid preparations in the stomach.Int J Pharmacol 1984: 19: 169–176.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tarnawsky A, Halter F, Schmassmann A, Vatier J, Garner A. Experimental models for the assessment of antacid action on gastrointestinal mucosa and ulcer healing.Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1992; 4: 966–976.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Andersen J, Naestal J, Strom M. Identical 24-hour gastric pH profiles when using intragastric antimony or glass electrodes or aspirated gastric juice.Scand J Gastroenterol 1988; 23: 375–379.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Savarino V, Mela GS, Zentillin P, et al. Gastric aspiration versus antimony and glass electrodes. A simultaneous cfomparative in vitro study.Scand J Gastroenterol 1989; 24: 434–43Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Monés
    • 1
  • I. Carrio
    • 2
  • S. Sainz
    • 1
  • L. Berná
    • 2
  • P. Clavé
    • 1
  • M. Liszkay
    • 3
  • M. Roca
    • 2
  • F. Vilardell
    • 1
  1. 1.Servicio de Patologia DigestivaHospital de la Santa Creu i Sant PauBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Serviccio de Medicina NuclearHospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universitat Autónoma BarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.Bayer AGGermany

Personalised recommendations