A comparison between simple aspiration, marker correction, and marker perfusion techniques in the estimation of pancreatic function.

Results of pancreatic function tests, using simple aspiration, simple aspiration with marker correction and marker perfusion methods were compared. With simple aspiration alone, approximately one-third of the marker was not recovered. Yet with the marker correction method the volume (and consequently other measurements), appeared to be greatly overcorrected, probably owing to poor mixing of marker and endogenous secretions. In contrast, the marker perfusion method yielded data which were 8-24% higher than those for simple aspiration for the various outputs; this difference was not statistically significant. It is concluded, firstly, that marker correction of a simple aspiration technique is inaccurate because of poor mixing; secondly, that because marker perfusion methods yield arithmetically but not statistically greater outputs than simple aspirations tests, the latter are probably adequate for diagnostic tests of pancreatic function.