1985
DOI: 10.1002/bdd.2510060108
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On pharmacokinetics in target tissues

Abstract: Based on a two-compartment organ model the total exposure in a target tissue, the mean tissue residence time and the peak time of the tissue concentration are evaluated in terms of tissue to blood partition coefficient and permeability coefficient (membrane permeability) of the drug, as well as the organ volume and blood flow. The total exposure is dependent upon the partition coefficient whereas the mean residence time is also affected by the permeability coefficient of the target organ. The peak time of tiss… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1989
1989
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…where AUCT,, is the area under the tissue concentration-time profile, AUC, is the area under the plasma concentration-time profile, and RMT, is the tissue-plasma partition coefficient. 16 The MINIM computer programI7 was used to numerically integrate eqs 5,7, and 9 (using the concentration-time data in underlying tissues) or 10 (using the underlying tissue concentration minus contralateral tissue concentration data) and simultaneously fit the lidocaine data obtained as the solution for cell, dermis, subcutaneous tissue, and fascia using weighted (l/Ci) least squares with Hartley modification of the Gauss-Newton algorithm. A sixth order polynomial input function representation of the observed solute concentrations in the plasmatime profiles was used.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where AUCT,, is the area under the tissue concentration-time profile, AUC, is the area under the plasma concentration-time profile, and RMT, is the tissue-plasma partition coefficient. 16 The MINIM computer programI7 was used to numerically integrate eqs 5,7, and 9 (using the concentration-time data in underlying tissues) or 10 (using the underlying tissue concentration minus contralateral tissue concentration data) and simultaneously fit the lidocaine data obtained as the solution for cell, dermis, subcutaneous tissue, and fascia using weighted (l/Ci) least squares with Hartley modification of the Gauss-Newton algorithm. A sixth order polynomial input function representation of the observed solute concentrations in the plasmatime profiles was used.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach can provide an acceptable fit of experimental results. In general, however, such models tend to oversimplify in vivo phenomena (21,29,46,47) and fail to account for nonlinear pharmacokinetic behavior. Our data suggest that the nonlinear processes that influence the disposition of highly protein-bound drugs should also be anticipated for poorly protein-bound antibiotics, such as amikacin (26).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In vivo data were characterised using model-independent pharmacokinetic analysis [18]. The calculated pharmacokinetic parameters were: total area under the curve (AUC 0 ∞ ), plasma clearance (Cl), apparent distribution volume (Vd), mean residence time (MRT), and plasma or tissue half-life (t 1/2 ).…”
Section: Kinetic Analysis 261 Model-independent Analysis Of In Vivo S...mentioning
confidence: 99%