ArticleClinical cardiology1999
Pharmacokinetics and consistency of pericardial delivery directed to coronary arteries: direct comparison with endoluminal delivery.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 1999. 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, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanoparticles administered intrapericardially enhance payload myocardial distribution and retention.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2017Article
- Pericardial diseases in the era of imaging, biomarkers and molecular diagnosis.Heart failure reviews · 2013Article
- Gene therapy for myocardial angiogenesis: has it come of age?Current atherosclerosis reports · 2000Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
background and hypothesisPharmacologic modulation of the contents of the pericardial space has been shown to influence the response of coronary arteries to balloon injury. Endoluminal (EL) local delivery of various drugs into coronaries has been found to be limited by short residence time, as well as by highly variable deposited agent concentration. We hypothesized that compounds placed into the pericardial space (P) would penetrate into coronary tissue with greater consistency than seen after EL delivery and provide for prolonged coronary exposure to agents. METHODS AND
results125I-labeled basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), albumin, or 131I-labeled diazeniumdiolated albumin (NONO-albumin) were delivered as model/therapeutic proteins into the porcine pericardial space (n = 15 pigs) or into coronaries using an EL delivery catheter (n = 48 arteries). In subjects receiving 125I-labeled proteins, the delivery target or mid-regions of the left anterior descending (LAD) and left circumflex (LCx) arteries were harvested at 1 h or 24 h for gamma-counting and autoradiography, and fractional intramural delivery (FID) or retention measured as percent agent in 100 mg artery/agent in infusate for both time points. In the animals receiving 131I-labeled NONO-albumin, serial gamma imaging was employed to evaluate the rate of redistribution in individual animals following either pericardial or endoluminal delivery. At 1 h, FID values ranged from 0.00064 to 0.0052% for P delivery (median 0.0022%), and from 0.00021 to 6.7 for EL delivery (median 0.27%). At 24 h, FID values ranged from 0.00011 to 0.003 for P delivery (median 0.0013), and from 0.0002 to 1.4 for EL delivery. The estimated T1/2 for bFGF redistribution from the vascular tissue was 22 h (P) and 7 h (EL), respectively, while the directly determined T1/2 values for NONO-albumin redistribution from the delivery region were 22.2 h (P) and 2.5 h (EL).
conclusionsThese data show that pericardial fluid contents can access coronary arteries with intramural concentrations which typically vary by 10-15-fold, while EL delivery results in a remarkably wide intramural concentration range with up to 33,000-fold variability. The apparent redistribution rate is more rapid following EL delivery, possibly due to sustained diffusive tissue loading from the pericardial space. Pericardial delivery appears to offer substantial advantages over EL administration with respect to residence time and reproducibility.
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.