4.3 Article

Surface area of the digestive tract - revisited

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 49, 期 6, 页码 681-689

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/00365521.2014.898326

关键词

adult; diameter; digestive tract; human; length; microvilli; surface area; vertical sections; villi

资金

  1. Sahlgrenska University Hospital (LF: ALF)
  2. University of Gothenburg

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. According to textbooks, the human gut mucosa measures 260-300 m(2), that is, in the order of a tennis court. However, the quantitative data are incomplete and sometimes conflicting. Objectives. To review the literature regarding the mucosal surface area of the human digestive tract; to collect morphometric data from the parts of the gut where such data are missing; and to recalculate the mucosal surface area of the intestine in man. Methods. With focus on the intestine, we carried out morphometry by light and electron microscopy on biopsies from healthy adult volunteers or patients with endoscopically normal mucosae. Results. Literature review of intubation or radiological methods indicates an oroanal length of similar to 5 m, two-third of which refers to the small intestine. However, there is a considerable variation between individuals. The inner diameter of the small intestine averages 2.5 cm and that of the large intestine averages 4.8 cm. The mucosa of the small intestine is enlarged similar to 1.6 times by the plicae circulares. Morphometric data obtained by light and electron microscopy of biopsies demonstrate that villi and microvilli together amplify the small intestinal surface area by 60-120 times. Surface amplification due to microvilli in the colon is similar to 6.5 times. The mean total mucosal surface of the digestive tract interior averages similar to 32 m(2), of which about 2 m(2) refers to the large intestine. Conclusion. The total area of the human adult gut mucosa is not in the order of tennis lawn, rather is that of half a badminton court.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据