Cited by 33

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Naturally occurring conjugated bile acids, measured by high-performance liquid chromatography, in human, dog, and rabbit bile

Wildgrube, H.J., Stockhausen, H., Petri, J., Füssel, U., Lauer, H.·1986·Journal of Chromatography A

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the biliary pattern of conjugated bile acids after stimulation of their enterohepatic circulation. Conjugated bile acids were separated by reversed-phase ion-pair chromatography without prior derivatization. A MicroPak SP-C18-IP-4 column was used as non-polar matrix, and an ionic alkyl compound, tetrabutylammonium phosphate, was added to the mobile phase, which was a mixture of acetonitrile and water. Quantification was made by UV absorption at 210 nm with external standardization. In fourteen human patients with external biliary drainage after papillotomy there was preferential glycine conjugation. The mean values were 36.5% for glycocholic acid, 33% for glycochenodeoxycholic acid, and 10.0% for glycodeoxycholic acid. Only 15.2% of the biliary bile acids were taurine metabolites. Conjugates of ursodeoxycholic acid were below 2.1%. In most cases, conjugated lithocholic acid was not detected. Within 4 h after ingestion of a standardized meal there were no significant changes in the biliary bile acid pattern. In four dogs (beagles), glycine-conjugated bile acids were lacking. The mean values were 74.3% for taurocholic acid, 14.9% for taurodeoxycholic acid, and 5.3% for taurochenodeoxycholic acid. In six rabbits, 87.4% of biliary bile acids was identified as glycodeoxycholic acid and 5.3% as glycocholic acid. In conscious dogs, as well as in rabbits, the stimulation of biliary secretion by cholecystokinin and/or secretin had no effect on th…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0021-9673(01)87090-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Admirand, 1968, J. Clin. Invest., 47, 1043, 10.1172/JCI105794 · DOI
  2. Wildgrube, 1983, J. Chromatogr., 282, 603, 10.1016/S0021-9673(00)91637-6 · DOI
  3. Heftmann, 1979, J. Chromatogr., 165, 283, 10.1016/S0021-9673(00)88186-8 · DOI
  4. Parris, 1977, J. Chromatogr., 133, 237, 10.1016/S0021-9673(00)83484-6 · DOI
  5. Bloch, 1978, J. Lipid Res., 19, 510, 10.1016/S0022-2275(20)40724-2 · DOI
  6. Shaw, 1978, Lipids, 13, 971, 10.1007/BF02533858 · DOI
  7. Sian, 1979, Clin. Chim. Acta, 98, 243, 10.1016/0009-8981(79)90151-7 · DOI
  8. Maruyama, 1980, Clin. Chim. Acta, 100, 47, 10.1016/0009-8981(80)90184-9 · DOI
  9. Mingrone, 1980, J. Chromatogr., 183, 277, 10.1016/S0378-4347(00)81707-7 · DOI
  10. Nakayama, 1980, J. Chromatogr., 183, 287, 10.1016/S0378-4347(00)81708-9 · DOI
  11. Linnet, 1982, Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest., 42, 455, 10.3109/00365518209168113 · DOI
  12. Ruben, 1982, Clin. Chim. Acta, 119, 41, 10.1016/0009-8981(82)90403-X · DOI
  13. Schill, 1965, Acta Pharm. Sue., 2, 13
  14. Persson, 1966, Acta Pharm, Sue., 3, 281
  15. Carey, 1975, N. Engl. J. Med., 293, 1255, 10.1056/NEJM197512112932412 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Wildgrube, H. J., Stockhausen, H., Petri, J., Füssel, U., & Lauer, H.
Venue
Journal of Chromatography A
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1986-02
Volume
353
Pages
207-213
ISSN
0021-9673
Cited by
33
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review