1983
DOI: 10.1097/00007691-198306000-00006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Usefulness of Theophylline Saliva Levels in Neonates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Khanna et al 7 reported that saliva levels are reliable for monitoring the therapy with both theophylline and caffeine in premature infants. Three years later, Toback et al 9 revealed a ratio between serum and saliva of 1.02±0.09, which is smaller than in other studies. They estimated that saliva concentration in premature infants is approximately equal to serum concentration of theophylline.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Khanna et al 7 reported that saliva levels are reliable for monitoring the therapy with both theophylline and caffeine in premature infants. Three years later, Toback et al 9 revealed a ratio between serum and saliva of 1.02±0.09, which is smaller than in other studies. They estimated that saliva concentration in premature infants is approximately equal to serum concentration of theophylline.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…They estimated that saliva concentration in premature infants is approximately equal to serum concentration of theophylline. 9 In the study of Aviram et al, 8 the ratio was 1.78±0.22 and the correlation coefficient r ¼ 0.96. These authors included both premature infants and older children with asthma in their study group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In contrast to the Toback et al . study, just 3 years later Khanna et al . reported a correlation value as low as 0.7 compared to Toback's 0.98.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…'s study was similar to the observations of others , while Toback et al . suggest the ratio to be closer to 1. Also, that found by Culea et al .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 91%