Tissue Distribution of Enrofloxacin in African Clawed Frogs (Xenopus laevis) after Intramuscular and Subcutaneous Administration
Comparative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA. .Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science: JAALAS (Impact Factor: 1.12). 04/2013; 52(2):186-8.
As part of an enrofloxacin pharmacokinetic study, concentrations of enrofloxacin and ciprofloxacin (metabolite) were measured in various tissues (brain, heart, kidney, liver, lung, and spleen) collected from treated (subcutaneous delivery, n = 3; intramuscular delivery, n = 3; untreated controls, n = 2) adult female Xenopus laevis by using HPLC. Enrofloxacin was rapidly absorbed after administration by either route and readily diffused into all sampled tissues. Enrofloxacin and ciprofloxacin were present in the tissue samples collected at 8 h. The highest average tissue concentrations for enrofloxacin were found in kidney, with the lowest concentrations in liver. Ciprofloxacin tissue concentrations paralleled but were always lower than those of enrofloxacin for all time points and tissues except brain and kidney. These results, together with previously published pharmacokinetic data and known minimal inhibitory concentrations of common pathogenic bacteria, provide a strong evidence-based rationale for choosing enrofloxacin to treat infectious diseases in X. laevis.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We examined the efficacy of enrofloxacin administered by 2 different routes in a mouse model of sepsis. Male CD1 mice were infected with a bioluminescent strain of enteropathogenic Escherichia coli and treated with enrofloxacin either by injection or in drinking water. Peak serum levels were evaluated by using HPLC. Mice were monitored for signs of clinical disease, and infections were monitored by using bioluminescence imaging. Serum levels of enrofloxacin and the active metabolite ciprofloxacin were greater in the group treated by injection than in controls or the groups treated by administration in drinking water. Survival of the group treated with enrofloxacin injection was greater than that of controls and groups treated with enrofloxacin in the drinking water. Bioluminescence in the group treated with enrofloxacin injection was less than that in the groups treated with oral administration at 12 h and in the groups treated orally and the control group at 16 h. According to these findings, we recommend the use of injectable enrofloxacin at 5 mg/kg SC for mice with systemic infections.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic characteristics of enrofloxacin (ENR) injectable in situ gel we developed in dogs following a single intramuscular (i.m.) administration. Twelve healthy dogs were randomly divided into two groups (six dogs per group), then administrated a single 20 mg/kg body weight (b.w.) ENR injectable in situ gel and a single 5 mg/kg b.w. ENR conventional injection, respectively. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was used to determine ENR plasma concentrations. The pharmacokinetic parameters of ENR injectable in situ gel and conventional injection in dogs are as follows: MRT (mean residence time) (45.59 ± 14.05) h verse (11.40 ± 1.64) h, AUC (area under the blood concentration vs. time curve) (28.66 ± 15.41) μg·h/mL verse (11.06 ± 3.90) μg·h/mL, cmax (maximal concentration) (1.59 ± 0.35) μg/mL verse (1.46 ± 0.07) μg/mL, tmax (time needed to reach cmax ) (1.25 ± 1.37) h verse (1.40 ± 0.55) h, t1/2λz (terminal elimination half-life) (40.27 ± 17.79) h verse (10.32 ± 0.97) h. The results demonstrated that the in situ forming gel system could increase dosing interval of ENR and thus reduced dosing frequency during long-term treatment. Therefore, the ENR injectable in situ gel seems to be worth popularizing in veterinary clinical application. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.