ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and biopharmaceutics1995
Discrepancies in pharmacokinetic parameter estimation between bolus and infusion studies in the perfused rat hindlimb.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and biopharmaceutics, 1995. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drug structure-transport relationships.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2010Review
- Prediction of in vivo tissue distribution from in vitro data 1. Experiments with markers of aqueous spaces.Pharmaceutical research · 2000Article
- Similarity or discrepancy in pharmacokinetic parameter estimation between bolus and infusion studies.Journal of pharmacokinetics and biopharmaceutics · 1997Article
- A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model incorporating dispersion principles to describe solute distribution in the perfused rat hindlimb preparation.Journal of pharmacokinetics and biopharmaceutics · 1997Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Isolated, perfused rat hindlimb consists of skeletal muscle, skin, bone, and adipose. Hence, it is a heterogeneous preparation composed of slowly equilibrating tissues of different characteristics and fractional flow rates. This paper shows how caution should be exercised in interpreting the results following bolus administration and subsequent statistical moment analysis of intravascular markers (51Cr-erythrocytes and 125I-albumin) and lipophilic barbiturates. For the intravascular markers, the events in the hindlimb are overshadowed by events in the connecting tubing and cannulas, due to their comparable volumes. For the barbiturates, these estimates appear to apply to short-term effects as the volume estimates obtained following infusion to steady state are greater than after bolus administration. For the extravascular markers, 14C-sucrose, 14C-urea, and 3H-water, no such time dependency was shown. However, it is only from the outflow profiles following bolus administration that events in the tissue beds can be elucidated.
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.