AIM： To study the esophageal transit time （ETT） and compare its mean value among three anatomical inclinations of the body; and to analyze the correlation of ETT to body mass index （BMI）. METHODS： A biomagnetic ...AIM： To study the esophageal transit time （ETT） and compare its mean value among three anatomical inclinations of the body; and to analyze the correlation of ETT to body mass index （BMI）. METHODS： A biomagnetic technique was implemented to perform this study： （1） The transit time of a magnetic marker （MM） through the esophagus was measured using two fluxgate sensors placed over the chest of 14 healthy subjects; （2） the EIF was assessed in three anatomical positions （at upright, fowler, and supine positions; 90°, 45° and 0°, respectively）. RESULTS： ANOVA and Tuckey post-hoc tests demonstrated significant differences between E-IT mean of the different positions. The ETT means were 5.2 ± 1.1 s, 6.1 ± 1.5 s, and 23.6 ± 9.2 s for 90°, 45° and 0°, respectively. Pearson correlation results were r = -0.716 and P 〈 0.001 by subjects＇ anatomical position, and r = -0.024 and P 〉 0.05 according the subject＇s BMI. CONCLUSION： We demonstrated that using this biomagnetic technique, it is possible to measure the ETT and the effects of the anatomical position on the ETT.展开更多
文摘AIM： To study the esophageal transit time （ETT） and compare its mean value among three anatomical inclinations of the body; and to analyze the correlation of ETT to body mass index （BMI）. METHODS： A biomagnetic technique was implemented to perform this study： （1） The transit time of a magnetic marker （MM） through the esophagus was measured using two fluxgate sensors placed over the chest of 14 healthy subjects; （2） the EIF was assessed in three anatomical positions （at upright, fowler, and supine positions; 90°, 45° and 0°, respectively）. RESULTS： ANOVA and Tuckey post-hoc tests demonstrated significant differences between E-IT mean of the different positions. The ETT means were 5.2 ± 1.1 s, 6.1 ± 1.5 s, and 23.6 ± 9.2 s for 90°, 45° and 0°, respectively. Pearson correlation results were r = -0.716 and P 〈 0.001 by subjects＇ anatomical position, and r = -0.024 and P 〉 0.05 according the subject＇s BMI. CONCLUSION： We demonstrated that using this biomagnetic technique, it is possible to measure the ETT and the effects of the anatomical position on the ETT.
