RESUMO
Thirty-six patients with subarachnoid and intraventricular cysticercosis were randomly assigned to receive albendazole at 15 or 30 mg/kg/day plus dexamethasone for 8 days. Results favored a higher dose, with larger cyst reduction on MRI at 90 and 180 days and higher albendazole sulfoxide levels in plasma. An albendazole course at 30 mg/kg/day combined with corticosteroids is safe and more effective than the usual dose. A single treatment was insufficient in intraventricular and giant cysts.
Assuntos
Albendazol/administração & dosagem , Anticestoides/administração & dosagem , Ventrículos Cerebrais/parasitologia , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Neurocisticercose/tratamento farmacológico , Espaço Subaracnóideo/parasitologia , Adulto , Albendazol/efeitos adversos , Albendazol/uso terapêutico , Anticestoides/efeitos adversos , Anticestoides/uso terapêutico , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Esquema de Medicação , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Cefaleia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
A high-performance liquid chromatographic method for the determination of praziquantel in plasma, urine and rat liver homogenates has been developed. It requires 2 ml of biological fluid, an extraction using Sep-Pak cartridges, a 0.05 M phosphate buffer solution (pH 5.0) for equilibrating and washing and ethyl acetate-diisopropyl ether for drug elution. The analysis was performed on an Ultrasphere ODS C18 column with a mobile phase of acetonitrile-water with ultraviolet detection at 217 nm. The results showed that the assay is sensitive (31.2 ng/ml), linear between 0.125 and 4.0 micrograms/ml, precise (coefficient of variation = 10%) and selective with other drugs currently administered with praziquantel.
Assuntos
Cromatografia Líquida de Alta Pressão/métodos , Fígado/química , Praziquantel/análise , Animais , Humanos , Praziquantel/sangue , Praziquantel/urina , Ratos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Espectrofotometria UltravioletaRESUMO
An analysis is made of the scientific research and values influencing the policy decisions that led to the adoption of the 1966 U.S. standard for exposure to microwave radiation. This analysis is used as a tool for understanding the problems faced by those who set standards. An effort is made to unravel the complex motivations that lay behind the adoption of the microwave standard. Based on the past record, it is suggested that standard setting remain distinct from basic scientific research and that adversary procedures be used only as a last resort in seeking consensus over a proposed standard.