Veterinary dermatology · 2019
Diphenhydramine pharmacokinetics after oral and intravenous administration of diphenhydramine and oral administration of dimenhydrinate to healthy dogs, and pharmacodynamic effect on histamine-induced wheal formation: a pilot study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ehling Sarah, Bäumer Wolfgang, Papich Mark G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Histamine type-1 (H1) receptor antagonists such as diphenhydramine are frequently used for treatment of pruritus in dogs, yet therapeutic efficacy for allergic disorders is reported to be highly variable. Dimenhydrinate is a salt of diphenhydramine and 8-chlorotheophylline, and has been reported to produce superior oral absorption of diphenhydramine.
HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVE: To determine the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of diphenhydramine in dogs after intravenous (1 mg/kg) and oral (5 mg/kg) administration, and when given orally as dimenhydrinate at a dose of 10 mg/kg (≈5 mg/kg diphenhydramine).
ANIMALS: Each drug was administered to six healthy, fasted mixed-breed dogs in a research facility, using a cross-over design.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis of diphenhydramine and chlorotheophylline at defined intervals. Pharmacodynamic response was measured by histamine-mediated cutaneous wheal formation.
RESULTS: There was great variability in the data and one dog was an extreme outlier. The mean systemic availabilities of diphenhydramine were 7.8% and 22.0% after oral administration of diphenhydramine and dimenhydrinate, respectively, whereas the mean maximum concentrations were 36 (± 20) and 124 (± 46) ng/mL. The terminal elimination half-lives of diphenhydramine and dimenhydrinate were 5.0 (± 7.1) and 11.6 (± 17.7) h, respectively. Plasma diphenhydramine concentrations did not correlate with the percentage reduction in histamine-induced wheal formation. Theophylline reached plasma concentrations considered to be therapeutic for dogs.
CONCLUSION: Oral absorption of diphenhydramine was approximately three times greater with a longer half-life when it was administered as the combination product dimenhydrinate.
HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVE: To determine the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of diphenhydramine in dogs after intravenous (1 mg/kg) and oral (5 mg/kg) administration, and when given orally as dimenhydrinate at a dose of 10 mg/kg (≈5 mg/kg diphenhydramine).
ANIMALS: Each drug was administered to six healthy, fasted mixed-breed dogs in a research facility, using a cross-over design.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis of diphenhydramine and chlorotheophylline at defined intervals. Pharmacodynamic response was measured by histamine-mediated cutaneous wheal formation.
RESULTS: There was great variability in the data and one dog was an extreme outlier. The mean systemic availabilities of diphenhydramine were 7.8% and 22.0% after oral administration of diphenhydramine and dimenhydrinate, respectively, whereas the mean maximum concentrations were 36 (± 20) and 124 (± 46) ng/mL. The terminal elimination half-lives of diphenhydramine and dimenhydrinate were 5.0 (± 7.1) and 11.6 (± 17.7) h, respectively. Plasma diphenhydramine concentrations did not correlate with the percentage reduction in histamine-induced wheal formation. Theophylline reached plasma concentrations considered to be therapeutic for dogs.
CONCLUSION: Oral absorption of diphenhydramine was approximately three times greater with a longer half-life when it was administered as the combination product dimenhydrinate.