Am J Health-Syst Pharm
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Order Full text via Infotrieve
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
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
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bailey, L.
Right arrow Articles by Rogozinski, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bailey, L.
Right arrow Articles by Rogozinski, B.
American Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, Vol 48, Issue 12, 2627-2630
Copyright © 1991 by American Society of Health-System Pharmacists


Articles

Effect of syringe filter and i.v. administration set on delivery of propofol emulsion

LC Bailey, KT Tang, and BA Rogozinski


Propofol emulsion was studied to determine the effects of filtration and of passage through an i.v. administration set on drug concentration. To study syringe filter effects, propofol emulsion samples (Diprivan Injection, 10 mg/mL) were discharged through either a 5-mm filtering needle or a standard needle. To determine the effects of the i.v. administration set on propofol delivery, a diluted dispersion containing approximately 2 mg/mL was prepared from propofol emulsion and 5% dextrose injection. This formulation was siphoned into a 6-foot length of administration set tubing, from which samples were withdrawn at 0, 30, 60, and 120 minutes. Another 2-mg/mL diluted dispersion of propofol and 5% dextrose injection was placed in a glass reservoir and delivered through a 6-foot i.v. set at a rate of 1.75 mL/min, which corresponds to a low dosage rate of 0.05 mg.kg-1.min-1. Samples of the effluent were collected at 0, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 minutes. Samples collected from all three tests were assayed by using high-performance liquid chromatography. The mean propofol concentrations in the filtered and unfiltered samples were 96.05% and 96.09% of label claim, respectively, after discharge through needles; the difference was not significant. In the static study of the i.v. tubing effects, a 31.54-34.74% loss of propofol occurred after 120 min. In the study of propofol flowing through the i.v. tubing, the concentration dropped slightly in the initial sample, which was taken after the propofol was placed in the tubing. The concentration remained essentially constant for the first hour and then declined, with an overall average loss of 7.70%.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
 






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.