Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39367115›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of various vasopressin doses and routes of administration in a neonatal piglet model.

Marwa Ramsie, Po-Yin Cheung, Megan O'Reilly, Tze-Fun Lee, Georg M Schmölzer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marwa RamsieCentre for the Studies of Asphyxia and Resuscitation, Neonatal Research Unit, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Avenue NW, Edmonton, AB, T5H 3V9, Canada.
Po-Yin CheungCentre for the Studies of Asphyxia and Resuscitation, Neonatal Research Unit, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Avenue NW, Edmonton, AB, T5H 3V9, Canada.
Megan O'ReillyCentre for the Studies of Asphyxia and Resuscitation, Neonatal Research Unit, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Avenue NW, Edmonton, AB, T5H 3V9, Canada.
Tze-Fun LeeCentre for the Studies of Asphyxia and Resuscitation, Neonatal Research Unit, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Avenue NW, Edmonton, AB, T5H 3V9, Canada.
Georg M SchmölzerCentre for the Studies of Asphyxia and Resuscitation, Neonatal Research Unit, Royal Alexandra Hospital, 10240 Kingsway Avenue NW, Edmonton, AB, T5H 3V9, Canada. georg.schmoelzer@me.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epinephrine is the only recommended vasopressor during neonatal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. However, there are concerns about the potential adverse effects of epinephrine, which might hamper efficacy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. An alternative might be vasopressin, which has a preferable adverse effect profile, however, its optimal dose and route of administration is unknown. We aimed to compare the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of various vasopressin doses administered via intravenous (IV), intraosseous (IO), endotracheal (ETT), and intranasal (IN) routes in healthy neonatal piglets. Forty-four post-transitional piglets (1-3 days of age) were anesthetized, intubated via a tracheostomy, and randomized to receive vasopressin via intravenous (control), IO, ETT, or IN route. Heart rate (HR), arterial blood pressure, carotid blood flow, and cardiac function (e.g., stroke volume, ejection fraction) were continuously recorded throughout the experiment. Blood was collected prior to drug administration and throughout the observation period for pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetic analysis. Significant changes in hemodynamic parameters were observed following IO administration of vasopressin while pharmacokinetic parameters were not different between IV and IO vasopressin. Administration of vasopressin via ETT or IN did not change hemodynamic parameters and had significantly lower maximum plasma concentrations and systemic absorption compared to piglets administered IV vasopressin (p < 0.05). The IV and IO routes appear the most effective for vasopressin administration in neonatal piglets, while the ETT and IN routes appear unsuitable for vasopressin administration.

Indexed as

Animals, NewbornVasopressinsAdministration, IntravenousAnimalsBlood PressureCardiopulmonary ResuscitationDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration RoutesHeart RateHemodynamicsSwineVasoconstrictor AgentsVasoconstrictor AgentsVasopressinsInfantsNeonatal resuscitationNewbornPharmacodynamicsPharmacokineticsVasopressin

Identifiers

PMID39367115
PMCPMC11452715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.