J Clin Pharmacol
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kramer, W.
Right arrow Articles by Pickering, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kramer, W.
Right arrow Articles by Pickering, L.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Articles

Comparative bioavailability of intravenous and oral chloramphenicol in adults

WG Kramer, ER Rensimer, CD Ericsson, and LK Pickering

The comparative bioavailability of chloramphenicol from intravenous succinate, oral palmitate, and oral base preparations was studied in a crossover manner in 12 adult patients. Chloramphenicol was administered at a dose of 1 Gm every 6 hours, and blood samples were collected at steady state. For the succinate study, total urine output was also collected. The bioavailability of active chloramphenicol from the succinate preparation averaged 85.8 +/- 42.3 and 78.8 +/- 50.1 per cent of the free base and palmitate forms, respectively. This lower availability appeared to be due to variable excretion of unchanged succinate in the urine, averaging 27 +/- 11 per cent of the dose. Regardless of dosage form or route of administration, plasma chloramphenicol concentrations remained in the therapeutic range (5 to 25 mg/liter) for the entire dosage interval, implying that no change needs to be made when changing dosage form or route of administration. The interpatient variability, however, supports the need for monitoring of plasma chloramphenicol concentrations, especially in newborn infants, persons with liver disease, or those receiving other medications that alter chloramphenicol metabolism.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1984 by the American College of Clinical Pharmacology