Influence of infusate viscosity on intestinal absorption in the rat. An explanation of previous discrepant results

Beth W. Anderson, Julie M. Kneip, Allen S. Levine, Michael D. Levitt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

19 Scopus citations


Previous studies of the influence of increased luminal viscosity on intestinal absorption have yielded conflicting results ranging from no effect to a marked diminution. We measured the absorption of three probes (carbon monoxide, [14C]warfarin, 5.5 mM glucose) from a saline infusate or from saline containing 0.6% guar, which yielded a 20-fold increase in viscosity. Two animal models were used: (a) conscious nonlaparotomized rats with chronically implanted cannulas and (b) anesthetized laparotomized rats. In the anesthetized laparotomized rats, absorption was independent of perfusate viscosity. In the conscious nonlaparotomized rats, the absorption of each of the three probes was significantly greater than in the anesthetized laparotomized rats and increased viscosity caused a 60%-70% decrease in the clearance of the three probes. In anesthetized laparotomized rats, we have shown that fluid moves with laminar flow, and increased infusate viscosity cannot further reduce luminal stirring (or absorption). In conscious, nonlaparotomized rats, laminar flow is disrupted by normal gut motility causing better luminal stirring. Such stirring is inhibited by a viscous infusate resulting in decreased absorption. We conclude that the conflicting results seen in previous studies can be attributed to the model used. In conscious animals where luminal stirring was good, a viscous infusate caused decreased absorption.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)938-943
Number of pages6
Issue number4
StatePublished - Oct 1989

Bibliographical note

Copyright 2018 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.


Dive into the research topics of 'Influence of infusate viscosity on intestinal absorption in the rat. An explanation of previous discrepant results'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this