Acid Hypersecretion Important Factor or Innocent Bystander?

  • James Penston
  • Kenneth G. Wormsley


Peptic ulcers are discrete wounds of the mucosa of the esophagus, stomach, and duodenum or, following gastric surgery, of the small intestine which has been anastomosed to the stomach. Peptic ulcers have the common attribute of occurring only in those parts of the alimentary tract which are exposed to gastric secretions. This feature, together with the demonstration that gastric juice has the capacity to destroy animal tissues, has resulted in the belief that peptic ulceration is, in some way, caused by exposure of the affected mucosa to gastric secretions.


Gastric Juice Duodenal Ulcer Gastric Secretion Alimentary Tract Ulcer Patient 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Annotated Bibliography

  1. Baron JH: Clinical Tests of Gastric Secretion. Macmillan, London, 1978. This comprehensive monograph details the types and results of different secretory studies in controls and patients with ulcer disease.Google Scholar
  2. Brooks FP: The pathophysiology of peptic ulcer disease. Dig Dis Sci 30:15S–29S, 1985. An orthodox account of the pathophysiologic abnormalities recorded in patients with peptic ulcers.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Code CF: The role of gastric juice in the experimental production of peptic ulcer. Surg Clin North Am 23:1091–1101, 1943. An early review of the subject, which has been very influential in forming current views of the topic.Google Scholar
  4. Dragstedt LR: The pathogenesis of duodenal and gastric ulcers. Am J Surg 136:286–301, 1978. An authoritative account of the experimental surgical procedures used to determine the relationship between gastric secretion and ulcer disease.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feinstein AR: Clinical biostatistics. XLVII. Scientific standards vs. statistical associations and biologic logic in the analysis of causation. Clin Pharmacol Ther 25:481–492, 1979. An excellent analysis of the relationships between association of two factors and their potential causal relationship.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Hunt RH, Howden CW, Jones DB, et al: The correlation between acid suppression and peptic ulcer healing. Scand J Gastroenterol 21:(suppl)125:22–29, 1986. An example of the evidence linking therapeutic removal of gastric juice and ulcer healing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Robert A: Experimental production of duodenal ulcers. Biol Gastroenterol (Paris) 7:145–161, 1974. An excellent review of the different types of experimental approach used to produce duodenal ulcers in animals.Google Scholar
  8. Sackett DL: Bias in analytic research. J Chron Dis 32:51–63, 1979. An excellent account of the different sorts of bias encountered in selecting subjects for clinical studies.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Susser M: Rules of inference in epidemiology. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 6:116–128, 1986. A comprehensive account of the rules for inferring causality in an epidemiologic relationship.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Szabo S: Pathogenesis of duodenal ulcer disease. Lab Invest 51:121–147, 1984. A comprehensive account of the etiologic inferences that can be obtained from modern animal experiments.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Wormsley KG: Duodenal ulcer: Does pathophysiology equal aetiology? Gut 24:775–780, 1983. A critical review of the supposed pathophysiologic bases of duodenal ulceration.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wormsley KG: Aetiology of ulcers. Bailliere’s 2:555–571, 1988. A comprehensive review of the possible etiologic bases of ulcer disease, assuming that gastric juice is irrelevant for ulcerogenesis.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Penston
    • 1
  • Kenneth G. Wormsley
    • 1
  1. 1.Ninewells HospitalDundeeScotland

Personalised recommendations