METHODS: The articles related to the topic were identified through Medline and PubMed search (1968-Feburary 2010) for English language on the interaction between parenteral nutrition and antiepileptic drugs; the search terms used were anti-epileptic drugs, parenteral nutrition, and/or interaction, and/or in vitro. The search looked for prospective randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies; prospective nonrandomized uncontrolled studies; retrospective studies; case reports; and in vitro studies. Full text of the articles were then traced from the Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) library subscribed databases, including Wiley-Blackwell Library, Cochrane Library, EBSCOHost, OVID, ScienceDirect, SAGE Premier, Scopus, SpringerLINK, and Wiley InterScience. The articles from journals not listed by USM library were traced through inter library loan.
RESULTS: There were interactions between parenteral nutrition and drugs, including antiepileptics. Several guidelines were designed for the management of illnesses such as traumatic brain injuries or cancer patients, involving the use of parenteral nutrition and antiepileptics. Moreover, many studies demonstrated the in vitro and in vivo parenteral nutrition -drugs interactions, especially with antiepileptics.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence supporting the existence of parenteral nutrition-antiepileptic drugs interaction. The issue has not been studied in formal researches, but several case reports and anecdotes demonstrate this drug-nutrition interaction. However, alteration in the drug-free fraction result from parenteral nutrition-drug (i.e. antiepileptics) interactions may necessitate scrupulous reassessment of drug dosages in patients receiving these therapies. This reassessment may be particularly imperative in certain clinical situations characterized by hypoalbuminemia (e.g., burn patients).
METHODS: Plasma concentrations of artesunic acid and dihydroartemisinin were determined simultaneously by HPLC with electrochemical detection. The test drug was well tolerated and no undesirable adverse effects were observed.
RESULTS: Comparison of pharmacokinetic parameters of artesunic acid after oral and rectal administration showed statistically significant differences in t(max) and AUC, with no changes for Cmax and t1/2. As for dihydroartemisinin, differences were observed for t(max) and Cmax but not for AUC.
CONCLUSION: There appear to be pharmacokinetic differences between oral and rectal modes of administration. The significance of these findings should be explored in malaria patients before appropriate therapeutic regimens are devised.
Methods: Light-induced damage to the retina was created by exposure of adult albino Sprague-Dawley rats to intense light for 24 hours. A single dose of Cx43MP, Cx43MP-NPs, or saline was injected intravitreally at 2 hours after onset of light damage. Fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labelled Cx43MP-NPs were intravitreally injected to confirm delivery into the retina. Electroretinogram (ERG) recordings were performed at 24 hours, 1 week, and 2 weeks post cessation of light damage. The retinal and choroidal layers were analyzed in vivo using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and immunohistochemistry was performed on harvested tissues using glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), leukocyte common antigen (CD45), and Cx43 antibodies.
Results: FITC was visualized 30 minutes after injection in the ganglion cell layer and in the choroid. Cx43MP and Cx43MP-NP treatments improved a-wave and b-wave function of the ERG compared with saline-injected eyes at 1 week and 2 weeks post treatment, and prevented photoreceptor loss by 2 weeks post treatment. Inflammation was also reduced and this was in parallel with downregulation of Cx43 expression.
Conclusions: The slow release of Cx43MP incorporated into NPs is more effective at treating retinal injury than a single dose of native Cx43MP in solution by reducing inflammation and maintaining both retinal structure and function. This NP preparation has clinical relevance as it reduces possible ocular complications associated with repeated intravitreal injections.
METHOD: Eight pseudoternary phase triangles, containing ethyl oleate as the oil component and a mixture of two nonionic surfactants and n-alcohol or 1,2-alkanediol as a cosurfactant, were constructed and used for training, testing, and validation purposes. A total of 21 molecular descriptors were calculated for each cosurfactant. A genetic algorithm was used to select important molecular descriptors, and a supervised artificial neural network with two hidden layers was used to correlate selected descriptors and the weight ratio of components in the system with the observed phase behavior.
RESULTS: The results proved the dominant role of the chemical composition, hydrophile-lipophile balance, length of hydrocarbon chain, molecular volume, and hydrocarbon volume of cosurfactant. The best GNN model, with 14 inputs and two hidden layers with 14 and 9 neurons, predicted the phase behavior for a new set of cosurfactants with 82.2% accuracy for ME, 87.5% for LC, 83.3% for the O/W EM, and 91.5% for the W/O EM region.
CONCLUSIONS: This type of methodology can be applied in the evaluation of the cosurfactants for pharmaceutical formulations to minimize experimental effort.
METHODS: Hospitalised adult patients on EID gentamicin were selected. We considered a DFP of between 2 and 8 h as appropriate. Data from two blood samples (2 and 6 h postdose) from each patient were used to estimate the duration of DFP (i.e. DFP method 1). DFP was also calculated for the same patient using an empirically estimated elimination rate constant (Ke ) and the same 6 h postdose concentration value (DFP method 2). Correlation between the two methods was made. An alternative graphical method to estimate DFP was attempted.
KEY FINDINGS: Correlation between Ke and age was favourable (r = -0.453; P = 0.001). Ke derived from this empirical relationship was used to estimate DFP method 2. DFP method 1 correlated well with DFP method 2 (r = 0.742; P