ArticleJournal of feline medicine and surgery2019
Pharmacokinetics of low-dose and high-dose buprenorphine in cats after rectal administration of different formulations.
Article in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temperature-responsive hydrogel of oclacitinib maleate administered via the rectum in rabbit.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- A Comparison of the Intrarectal and Intramuscular Effects of a Dexmedetomidine, Ketamine and Midazolam Mixture on Tear Production in Cats: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Comparison of Certain Intrarectal versus Intramuscular Pharmacodynamic Effects of Ketamine, Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam in Cats.Veterinary sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesA prospective experimental study was performed in nine young healthy cats to investigate a pharmacokinetic profile and the clinical relevance of rectally administered buprenorphine. Rectal pH value was measured in all nine cats.
methodsBlood was collected 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 240 and 480 mins and 24 h after the rectal administration of a suppository and a gel at doses between 0.02 mg/kg and 0.1 mg/kg buprenorphine to determine the plasma concentration of buprenorphine. Rectal pH was measured with pH paper.
resultsUpon pharmacokinetic non-compartment analysis of high-dose buprenorphine (0.1 mg/kg), average maximal plasma concentration was found to be 1.13 ng/ml, time to maximal plasma concentration was 45 mins and area under the plasma concentration-time curve was 94.19 ng*min/ml, representing low but potential bioavailability. Mean residual time was 152.2 mins and the half-life was 92.6 mins. A wide range of plasma concentrations within the cohort was measured and two of the cats had to be excluded from statistical analysis owing to incomplete uptake. Vital parameters of all cats were considered to be normal but three of the cats showed mydriasis up to 8 h after application. After the administration of a low-dose suppository or a rectal gel (0.02 mg/kg) within pilot studies, no buprenorphine was detected in cat plasma. Rectal pH in all cats was between 7.7 and 8. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The rectal application of buprenorphine at a dose of 0.1 mg/kg revealed a potential but weak uptake in cats. Regarding effective concentrations in previous pharmacokinetic investigations, rectal administration is currently not recommended for good provision of opioid analgesia in cats. Pharmacological investigations of formulation and galenics in order to improve the rectal bioavailability of buprenorphine remain to be clarified before further dose-finding and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies are performed.
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.