J 2019

Comparison of Active Substance Losses and Total Weight Losses of Tablets Administered Via Feeding Tube

PAPIEŽ, Adriána, Klara ODEHNALOVA, Vladimír ŠRÁMEK a Pavel SUK

Základní údaje

Originální název

Comparison of Active Substance Losses and Total Weight Losses of Tablets Administered Via Feeding Tube

Autoři

PAPIEŽ, Adriána (703 Slovensko, domácí), Klara ODEHNALOVA (203 Česká republika), Vladimír ŠRÁMEK (203 Česká republika, domácí) a Pavel SUK (203 Česká republika, garant, domácí)

Vydání

PHARMACOLOGY, BASEL, KARGER, 2019, 0031-7012

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

30104 Pharmacology and pharmacy

Stát vydavatele

Švýcarsko

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Odkazy

Impakt faktor

Impact factor: 1.625

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14110/19:00109118

Organizační jednotka

Lékařská fakulta

UT WoS

000464384500004

Klíčová slova anglicky

Dosage forms; Drug administration routes; Nasogastric tube; Intensive care; High-pressure liquid chromatography

Štítky

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 18. 12. 2019 14:26, Mgr. Tereza Miškechová

Anotace

V originále

Background/Aims: Administration of tablets via feeding tube (FT) is often associated with significant drug losses, as was confirmed by weighing. The aim of this study was to measure the proportion of active substance losses (ASLs) in an in vitro model. Methods: A film-coated tablet (FilmCT) containing clopidogrel (Trombex (R)) and a tablet with enteric coating (EntericCT) containing pantoprazole (Controloc (R)) were crushed in a mortar and transferred by method A (tablet powder was transferred into the beaker, poured into the syringe and water added) and method B (water was added into the mortar, suspension drawn into the syringe) and administered via FT in an in vitro model. Total losses were measured with analytical balance and, simultaneously, ASL were analyzed with high-performance liquid chromatography UV-detection (HPLC-UV). Results: ASL was different to weighing only in the case of EntericCT prepared by method B (2.0 +/- 4.2 and 10.7 +/- 0.8% for HPLC-UV and weighing, respectively; p = 0.004). HPLC-UV confirmed significantly lower ASL when method B was used for either EntericCT (34.3 +/- 7.2 vs. 2.0 +/- 4.2%; p < 0.001) or FilmCT (14.1 +/- 2.2 vs. 7.7 +/- 4.1%; p < 0.01). Conclusion: Drug loss analysis with analytical balance may overestimate ASL, as was proved for EntericCT in this study. ASL were significantly lower when method B was used.