4.6 Article

Pharmacokinetics of Intravenous Lorazepam in Pediatric Patients with and without Status Epilepticus

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
卷 160, 期 4, 页码 667-+

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2011.09.048

关键词

-

资金

  1. Maternal and Child Health Bureau, Health Resources and Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services [U03MC00001, U03MC00003, U03MC00006, U03MC00007, U03MC00008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To evaluate the single dose pharmacokinetics of an intravenous dose of lorazepam in pediatric patients treated for status epilepticus (SE) or with a history of SE. Study design Ten hospitals in the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network enlisted patients 3 months to 17 years with convulsive SE (status cohort) or for a traditional pharmacokinetics study (elective cohort). Sparse sampling was used for the status cohort, and intensive sampling was used for the elective cohort. Non-compartmental analyses were performed on the elective cohort, and served to nest compartmental population pharmacokinetics analysis for both cohorts. Results A total of 48 patients in the status cohort and 15 patients in the elective cohort were enrolled. Median age was 7 years, 2 months. The population pharmacokinetics parameters were: clearance, 1.2 mL/min/kg; half-life, 16.8 hours; and volume of distribution, 1.5 L/kg. On the basis of the pharmacokinetics model, a 0.1 mg/kg dose is expected to achieve concentrations of approximately 100 ng/mL and maintain concentrations >30 to 50 ng/mL for 6 to 12 hours. A second dose of 0.05 mg/kg would achieve desired therapeutic serum levels for approximately 12 hours without excessive sedation. Age-dependent dosing is not necessary beyond using a maximum initial dose of 4 mg. Conclusions Lorazepam pharmacokinetics in convulsive SE is similar to earlier pharmacokinetics measured in pediatric patients with cancer, except for longer half-life, and similar to adult pharmacokinetics parameters except for increased clearance. (J Pediatr 2012;160:667-72).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据