ArticleEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics
Estimation of hepatic distributional volumes using non-labeled reference markers.
Article in European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Investigation of distribution and elimination of terbutaline sulfate in the perfused rat liver preparation.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hepatic distributional volumes were investigated in the in situ perfused rat liver. Perfusion experiments were conducted using Krebs bicarbonate buffer delivered via the portal vein in single-pass mode at a total flow rate of 15 mL/min. A bolus dose of normal erythrocytes (RBC, vascular marker) and Evans blue (EB, extracellular marker) respectively was administered in the presence and absence of protein. At the end of the experiment, liver total water content was determined by desiccation and freeze-drying methods. Similar moment analysis results and superimposable effluent curves were obtained in the presence (RBC, mean transit time [MTT]: 7.31 +/- 0.45 s and volume of distribution [V]: 0.17 +/- 0.01 mL/g; EB, MTT: 10.9 +/- 0.62 s and V: 0.25 +/- 0.02 mL/g) and in the absence (RBC, MTT: 7.55 +/- 0.84 s and V: 0.18 +/- 0.02 mL/g; EB, MTT: 9.24 +/- 0.77 s and V: 0.20 +/- 0.02 mL/g) of protein, which indicates that the hepatic distribution of RBC and EB within the liver is not influenced by protein. Furthermore, the almost identical results obtained with the desiccation and freeze-drying methods clearly suggest that the freeze-drying method can be used as an alternative to desiccation for the estimation of liver water content.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17315540What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.