ArticleMEDtube science2016
A Clinical Trial Simulation Evaluating Epinephrine Pharmacokinetics at various Dosing Frequencies during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.
Article in MEDtube science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Model-Informed Dose Selection of Intranasal Epinephrine in Young Children.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Article
- Intramuscular epinephrine in cardiac arrest: A systematic review.Resuscitation plus · 2025Review
- Advanced pharmacodynamics of cangrelor in healthy volunteers: a dose-finding, open-label, pilot trial.Thrombosis journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis article seeks to test the hypothesis that repeated 1mg intravenous epinephrine dosing intervals of 3-minutes and 5-minutes results in differences in the total drug exposure and the maximum epinephrine concentration using simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) dosing.
methodsPublished population pharmacokinetic parameters were identified in the literature and pharmacokinetic dosing simulations were conducted according to the 2015 American Heart Association guidelines for CPR in adults. The stochastic pharmacokinetic simulations were conducted in MATLAB and R for statistical programming.
resultsA total of 5000 simulations were conducted in MATLAB while 90,000 data points for the 3-minute dosing interval and 150,000 data points for the 5-minute epinephrine dosing interval resulted from pharmacokinetic simulations in R. The difference between the 3-minute and 5-minute dosing intervals for patients with a SAP score of 30, were found to be: Male ΔAUC=2416 and ΔCmax=71, Female ΔAUC=1422 and ΔCmax=41, and for a 70kg patient ΔAUC=2968 and ΔCmax=90. While in virtual healthy participants, the differences were calculated to be ΔAUC=2658 and ΔCmax=81 for 3-minute and 5-minute dosing frequencies.
conclusionsEpinephrine plasma levels during a simulated CPR scenario in a virtual patient population are dependent upon intravenous dosing intervals of either 3-minutes or 5-minutes. Based on the results of this clinical trial simulation, implications may exist that may require clinical studies investigating the influence of the 1mg epinephrine dosing frequency on the return of spontaneous circulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28435854PMC5399886W2972567269What 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.