Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of intranasal and intravenous dexmedetomidine.
Li, A; Yuen, V M; Goulay-Dufaÿ, S; Sheng, Y; Standing, J F; Kwok, P C L; Leung, M K M; Leung, A S; Wong, I C K; Irwin, M G.
Affiliation
  • Li A; Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
  • Yuen VM; Department of Anaesthesiology, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
  • Goulay-Dufaÿ S; Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
  • Sheng Y; UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
  • Standing JF; Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: j.standing@ucl.ac.uk.
  • Kwok PCL; Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Electronic address: philip.kwok@sydney.edu.au.
  • Leung MKM; Department of Anaesthesiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong.
  • Leung AS; Department of Anaesthesiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong.
  • Wong ICK; Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
  • Irwin MG; Department of Anaesthesiology, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Br J Anaesth ; 120(5): 960-968, 2018 May.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29661413
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Intranasal dexmedetomidine produces safe, effective sedation in children and adults. It may be administered by drops from a syringe or by nasal mucosal atomisation (MAD NasalTM).

METHODS:

This prospective, three-period, crossover, double-blind study compared the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profile of i.v. administration with these two different modes of administration. In each session each subject received 1 µg kg-1 dexmedetomidine, either i.v., intranasal with the atomiser or intranasal by drops. Dexmedetomidine plasma concentration and Ramsay sedation score were used for PK/PD modelling by NONMEM.

RESULTS:

The i.v. route had a significantly faster onset (15 min, 95% CI 15-20 min) compared to intranasal routes by atomiser (47.5 min, 95% CI 25-135 min), and by drops (60 min, 95%CI 30-75 min), (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in sedation duration across the three treatment groups (P=0.88) nor in the median onset time between the two modes of intranasal administration (P=0.94). A 2-compartment disposition model, with transit intranasal absorption and clearance driven by cardiac output using the well-stirred liver model, was the final PK model. Intranasal bioavailability was estimated to be 40.6% (95% CI 34.7-54.4%) and 40.7% (95% CI 36.5-53.2%) for atomisation and drops respectively. Sedation score was modelled via a sigmoidal Emax model driven by an effect compartment. The effect compartment had an equilibration half time 3.3 (95% CI 1.8-4.7) min-1, and the EC50 was estimated to be 903 (95% CI 450-2344) pg ml-1.

CONCLUSIONS:

There is no difference in bioavailability with atomisation or nasal drops. A similar degree of sedation can be achieved by either method. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION HKUCTR-1617.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Dexmedetomidine / Hypnotics and Sedatives Type of study: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Br J Anaesth Year: 2018 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Hong Kong

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Dexmedetomidine / Hypnotics and Sedatives Type of study: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Br J Anaesth Year: 2018 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Hong Kong
...