Glass and antimony electrodes for long-term pH monitoring: a dynamic in vitro comparison
- PMID: 7866807
Glass and antimony electrodes for long-term pH monitoring: a dynamic in vitro comparison
Abstract
Objective: To compare the performance of combined glass microelectrodes with monocrystalline and polycrystalline antimony electrodes with external reference in a 24-h dynamic in vitro study.
Design and methods: In an artificial stomach, the pH of the contents titrated from pH1-7 and back by NaOH and HCI was simultaneously measured at 37 degrees C with antimony and glass probes connected to three recording devices. The recorded data were compared with data monitored continuously by a laboratory pH measurement system. The sensitivity and drift of glass microelectrodes were also analysed in intensive-care unit patients during intragastric pH monitoring for up to 96 h.
Results: The sensitivities of antimony polycrystalline, monocrystalline and of glass electrodes were 54.6, 55.3, and 61.8 mV/pH, respectively. The hysteresis was 6.4, 7.2 and 2.75 mV for antimony polycrystalline, monocrystalline and for glass electrodes, respectively. The drift in 24 h was -0.1 pH for glass over the pH range 1-7, and +0.3 pH over pH 1-2.5, and +0.15 pH over pH 2.5-7 for both of the antimony electrodes. The response times of both antimony and glass electrodes were similar over the pH range 2.5-7. The difference in the percentages of time below pH 1.5 was significant: 28.2% for glass, 17.3% for antimony polycrystalline and 18.1% for monocrystalline electrodes, respectively (P < 0.05). However, the difference in the percentages of time below pH 4 was not significant. After 96 h intragastric pH monitoring in six intensive-care unit patients, the mean drift of glass electrodes was 0.15 pH (range, pH 0.1-0.2) and the mean change in sensitivity 1.2%.
Conclusions: (1) Antimony electrodes may be acceptable for intra-oesophageal pH monitoring but are not suitable for intragastric use. (2) The use of glass microelectrodes is recommended for intragastric pH monitoring, particularly when extended monitoring over periods longer than 24 h is required.
Similar articles
-
Ambulatory oesophageal pH monitoring: a comparison between antimony, ISFET, and glass pH electrodes.Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 May;22(5):572-7. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0b013e328333139f. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010. PMID: 20009939 Clinical Trial.
-
Simultaneous comparison of 24-hour intragastric pH recording using glass and antimony electrodes in man.Dig Dis. 1990;8 Suppl 1:38-45. doi: 10.1159/000171278. Dig Dis. 1990. PMID: 2225518 Clinical Trial.
-
Slimline vs. glass pH electrodes: what degree of accuracy should we expect?Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006 Jan 15;23(2):331-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.02750.x. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006. PMID: 16393314
-
[Methodology and clinical significance of intragastric long-term pH measurement].Wien Med Wochenschr. 1992;142(8-9):167-9. Wien Med Wochenschr. 1992. PMID: 1509767 Review. German.
-
24-h recording of intragastric pH: technical aspects and clinical relevance.Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 1999;230:9-16. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 1999. PMID: 10499456 Review.
Cited by
-
A novel placement method of the Bravo wireless pH monitoring capsule for measuring intragastric pH.Dig Dis Sci. 2009 Mar;54(3):578-85. doi: 10.1007/s10620-008-0399-3. Epub 2008 Jul 23. Dig Dis Sci. 2009. PMID: 18649136
-
[Pharyngeal acid load and different functional endoscopy findings].HNO. 2019 Dec;67(12):940-947. doi: 10.1007/s00106-019-0723-6. HNO. 2019. PMID: 31407018 German.
-
Effect of omeprazole 40 mg once daily on intraduodenal and intragastric pH in H. pylori-negative healthy subjects.Dig Dis Sci. 1997 Nov;42(11):2304-9. doi: 10.1023/a:1018827003641. Dig Dis Sci. 1997. PMID: 9398810 Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials