Ocampo L, Páez D, Sumano H, Auró A

Language: English/Spanish
References: 10
Page: 201-207
PDF size: 59.98 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Producers of benzylpenicillin-G (BP-G) seek competitiveness not only through the actual cost/IU of activity, but also by modifying traditional powder preparations, i.e., as pre-suspended-stable suspensions. Considering the lack of stability of b-lactam antibacterials when suspended, and the different types and proportions of BP-G salts present in a given preparation, noticeable alterations in the in vitro activity and bioavailability could occur. To test these hypotheses, 3 powder preparations of BP-G, and 3 identically formulated preparations of pre-suspended BP-G, as well as a procaine-BP-G powder preparation were evaluated to determine their minimal inhibitory concentrations in various bacteria. Bioavailability was also assessed using an agar plate diffusion test to estimate the antibacterial-concentration activity (ACA) of the preparations, maximum plasma ACA (Cp_máx), and time to Cp_máx (t_máx), after one bolus IM dose. Results show that powder preparations of BP-G had greater in vitro potency than pre-suspended preparations of this antibacterial. Potency of powder preparations were at least two fold greater than the pre-suspended ones. Cp_máx values were greater when procaine BP-G was used, and minimum with the preparations containing benzathine BP-G. Preparations containing dihydrostreptomycin sulphate showed greater ACA than dihydrostreptomycin-free preparations; however, differences were not statistically significant (P › 0.05). This information may be of value to clinicians in particular when efficacy of BP-G against a given disease is borderline. These results question the concept of adding dihydrostreptomycin to BP-G preparations, and ponder procaine BP-G as the penicillin of choice for cattle.

REFERENCES

1. 1. Sumano LH. Farmacología clínica en bovinos. México (DF): Trillas, 1995.

2. 2. Chapman CB, Courage P, Nielsen IL, Sitararn BR, Huntington PJ. The role of procaine in adverse reactions to procaine penicillin in horses. Austr Vet J 1992;69:29-33.

3. 3. Vomend SK, Sumano LH. Adverse drug reactions and interactions in bovine medicine. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1990;197:899-905.

4. 4. Sumano LH, Ocampo CL. Farmacología veterinaria. 2a ed. México (DF): McGraw Hill/Interamericana,1997.

5. 5. Goodman L, Gillman A. The pharmacological basis of therapeutics. 4th ed. New York: MacMillan,1970.

6. 6. Sumano LH, Mateos TG, Brumbaugh GW. Bases farmacológicas del tratamiento de la mastitis. Vet Méx 1996;27:63-82.

7. 7. Sumano LH, Ocampo CL. Bases farmacológicas de la vigilancia de residuos de fármacos en productos de origen animal. Vet Méx 1995;26:175-182.

8. 8. Bennet JB, Brodie JL, Benner EJ, Kirby WM. Simplified accurate method for antibiotic assay. Clinical specimens. Am Soc Microbiol 1966;14:170-177.

9. 9. Sumano LH, Ocampo CL. Serum and synovial concentrations of penicillin G in horses after two different dose schemes. Equine Pract 1993;16:18-21.

10. 10. Sumano LH, Brumbaugh GW. Farmacología clínica de los aminoglicósidos y los aminociclitoles en medicina veterinaria. Vet Méx 1995;26:1-15.