ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2009
Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a new reformulated microemulsion and the long-chain triglyceride emulsion of propofol in beagle dogs.
Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel Approach for Characterizing Propofol Binding Affinities to Serum Albumins from Different Species.ACS omega · 2020Article
- Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic model of propofol externally validated in children.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2015Article
- Impact of aminophylline on the pharmacodynamics of propofol in beagle dogs.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2014Article
- A population pharmacokinetic approach to describe cephalexin disposition in adult and aged dogs.Veterinary medicine international · 2014Article
- Feline drug metabolism and disposition: pharmacokinetic evidence for species differences and molecular mechanisms.The Veterinary clinics of North America. Small animal practice · 2013Review
- The effect and optimal dose of sufentanil in reducing injection pain of microemulsion propofol.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2011Article
- Pain on propofol injection: Causes and remedies.Indian journal of pharmacologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeMicroemulsion propofol was developed to eliminate lipid solvent-related adverse events of long-chain triglyceride emulsion (LCT) propofol. We compared dose proportionality, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of both formulations. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: The study was a randomized, two-period and crossover design with 7-day wash-out period. Microemulsion and LCT propofol were administered by zero-order infusion (0.75, 1.00 and 1.25 mg kg(-1) min(-1)) for 20 min in 30 beagle dogs (male/female = 5/5 for each rate). Arterial samples were collected at preset intervals. The electroencephalographic approximate entropy (ApEn) was used as a measure of propofol effect. Dose proportionality, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic bioequivalence were evaluated by non-compartmental analyses. Population analysis was performed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling. KEY
resultsBoth formulations showed dose proportionality at the applied dose range. The ratios of geometric means of AUC(last) and AUC(inf) between both formulations were acceptable for bioequivalence, whereas that of C(max) was not. The pharmacodynamic bioequivalence was indicated by the arithmetic means of AAC (areas above the ApEn time curves) and E(0) (baseline ApEn)-E(max) (maximally decreased ApEn) between both formulations. The pharmacokinetics of both formulations were best described by three compartment models. Body weight was a significant covariate for V(1) of both formulations and sex for k(21) of microemulsion propofol. The blood-brain equilibration rate constants (k(e0), min(-1)) were 0.476 and 0.696 for microemulsion and LCT propofol respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Microemulsion propofol was pharmacodynamically bioequivalent to LCT propofol although pharmacokinetic bioequivalence was incomplete, and demonstrated linear pharmacokinetics at the applied dose ranges.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.