AJP - Renal Information on EB 2010
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 241: F238-F243, 1981;
0363-6127/81 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hartupee, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Knox, F. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hartupee, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Knox, F. G.

AJP - Renal Physiology, Vol 241, Issue 3 238-F243, Copyright © 1981 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Measurement of nephron filtration in the dog: role of proximal intratubular pressure

D. A. Hartupee, A. H. Gillies and F. G. Knox

Previous studies concerning the measurement of single nephron filtration rate have shown that collections of proximal tubular fluid, in which an oil drop is held in a constant position, do not affect intratubular pressure in the early proximal tubule in the hydropenic rat. Since intratubular pressures are higher in the dog than the rat, we investigated the effect of position-controlled collections on proximal pressure and single nephron filtration rate (SNGFR) in the dog. During position-controlled collections, early proximal pressure fell 5.8 +/- 0.9 mmHg and SNGFR was 76.3 +/- 5.3 nl/min. During proximal re-collections, in which proximal pressure was maintained near the free-flow value using a long immobile oil block, SNGFR was significantly less, 44.4 +/- 5.5 nl/min. For each micropunctured kidney, SNGFR was also estimated by dividing GFR by the number of glomeruli (mean, 5.4 +/- 0.5 X 10(5)). Estimated SNGFR (50.9 +/- 6.3 nl/min) was not significantly different from pressure-controlled SNGFR but was significantly less than position-controlled SNGFR. Accordingly, in the dog, early proximal pressure decreases during position-controlled collection of proximal tubular fluid, resulting in an overestimation of SNGFR. This artifact can be avoided by controlling the intratubular pressure during collection of tubular fluid.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online