Effect of Ketoprofen Co-administration and Febrile State on Pharmacokinetic of Cefepime in Goats

Bioavailability Study of Cefepime After Intravenous and Intramuscular Administration in Normal Broiler Chickens

“…In comparison to other cephalosporin, the absorption half-life of cefepime in chicken agreed with those reported in Cefquinome in piglets (0.41 ± 0.36h, (Li, et al, 2008) but disagreed with that reported in Ceftiofur in chickens (0.759 ± 0.03 h) (Dalia et al, 2015), Ceftiofur in rabbits (0.09 ± 0.03 h, Kamil, et al, 2015), Cefquinome in black swans 0.12 h (Zhao et al, 2017), Ceftiofur sodium in adult cockatiels and Amazon parrots 0.28 ; 0.93 h (Tell et al,1998), Cefquinome in chickens 0.07 ± 0.02 h (Xie, et al, 2013) and Cefquinome in ducks 0.12± 0.02h (Liguo Yuan et al, 2011) The difference is probably due to the difference in the dosage level since we used a dose of 100 mg/kg b.wt. Cefepime reached to a maximum serum concentration (Tmax) after (1.14±0.01 h) which nearly similar to cefepime that previously reported in bull camels 1.0±0.02 h (Goudah et al, 2009), calves 1.1±0.08 h (Ismail, 2005b), goats 0.91±0.08h (El-Hewaity, 2014) and ewes 1.1±0.2 h (Ismail, 2005a) but disagreed with those reported in calves 0.75 h; 0.75 h (Joshi and Sharma, 2007;Patel, et al, 2012) respectively, goats 0.80±0.11h; 0.5h (Bhavsar et al, 2008;Prawez et al, 2010), rabbits 0.5 h (Goudah et al, 2006) and sheep 0.75 h (Patel et al, 2010). In comparison to other cephalosporin, the time to reach a maximum serum concentration (Tmax) was disagreed with those reported in Ceftiofur in chickens 2.51± 0.088 h, (Dalia, et al, 2015),Cefquinome in broiler chickens 2.…”

“…The reported half-life of absorption (t1/2ab) was (0.49±0.03h) which is similar to cefepime recorded in ewes (0.49±0.05h) (Ismail, 2005a). However, it disagree with cefepime reported in goats (0.77±0.34; 0.25±0.02; 0.16±0.01 h, (Bhavsar et al, 2008;Prawez et al, 2010;El-Hewaity, 2014), respectively, bull camels (2.5 ± 0.27 h, Goudah et al, 2009) and calves (0.29 ± 0.02; 0.17 ± 0.01 h, (Ismail, 2005b;Patel et al, 2012) respectively. In comparison to other cephalosporin, the absorption half-life of cefepime in chicken agreed with those reported in Cefquinome in piglets (0.41 ± 0.36h, (Li, et al, 2008) but disagreed with that reported in Ceftiofur in chickens (0.759 ± 0.03 h) (Dalia et al, 2015), Ceftiofur in rabbits (0.09 ± 0.03 h, Kamil, et al, 2015), Cefquinome in black swans 0.12 h (Zhao et al, 2017), Ceftiofur sodium in adult cockatiels and Amazon parrots 0.28 ; 0.93 h (Tell et al,1998), Cefquinome in chickens 0.07 ± 0.02 h (Xie, et al, 2013) and Cefquinome in ducks 0.12± 0.02h (Liguo Yuan et al, 2011) The difference is probably due to the difference in the dosage level since we used a dose of 100 mg/kg b.wt.…”

“…In comparison to other cephalosporins, the halflife of distribution is nearly similar to that previously reported in Cefquinome in yellow cattle 0.29 ± 0.05h (Shan, et al, 2013), Cefquinome in piglets 0.27 ± 0.21h (Li, et al,2008), Cefquinome in broiler chickens 0.155 h (Maha, et al, 2005) and Cefquinome in ducks 0.19 ± 0.05h (Yuan, et al, 2011) but not agreed with that reported for Ceftiofur in rabbits 0.34 ± 0.07 h (Kamil et al, 2015), Cefquinome in black swans 0.31 ± 0.03 h, (Zhao, et al, 2017) Cefquinome in chickens 0.43 ± 0.19 h, (Xie, et al, 2013), Ceftiofur in chickens 0.70 ± 0.38 h, (Shen, et al, 2009). The volume of distribution (Vdss) was closely related to cefepime that reported in goats 0.44 ± 0.01; 0.35 ± 0.03 mg/kg, (Bhavsar, et al,2008;El-Hewaity, 2014) respectively, calves (0.42 ± 0.08; 0.43 ± 0.03; 0.52 ± 0.03 mg/kg (Patel, et al, 2006;Joshi and Sharma, 2007;Patel, et al, 2012) respectively and sheep 0.42 ± 0.02 mg/kg, (Patel et al, 2006) but higher than that reported in bull camels 0.10 ± 0.04 mg/kg, (Goudah, et al, 2009), calves 0.21 ± 0.01 mg/kg (Ismail, 2005b), ewes 0.32 ± 0.01 mg/kg, (Ismail, 2005a) and neonatal foals and adult dogs 0.18 ± 0.05; 0.14 ± 0.04 mg/kg (Gardner and Papich 2001) respectively. In comparison to other cephalosporin, The volume of distribution was closely related to that reported in Cefquinome in piglets 0.46 ± 0.1h, (Li et al, 2008) and Cefquinome in chickens 0.49 ± 0.05 mg/kg, (Xie, et al, 2013) but disagreed with that recorded in Ceftiofur in rabbits (260 ± 71 mg/kg, (Kamil et al, 2015), Cefquinome in black swans 0.32 ± 0.17 mg/kg (Zhao, et al, 2017),Cefquinome in chickens 0.43 ± 0.19 mg/kg, (Xie, et al, 2013), Cefquinome in chickens 0.21 mg/kg (Maha, et al, 2005), Cefquinome Sulfate in rabbits 0.75 ± 0.029 mg/kg (Qiang, et al, 2013), Cefquinome in ducks 0.41 ± 0.04 mg/kg, (Yuan et al,2011) and Ceftiofur in chickens 0.18 ± 0.05 mg/kg, (Shen, et al, 2009).…”

“…The peptidoglycan layer is important for cell wall structural integrity. The pharmacokinetics of cefepime has been extensively investigated in various animal species as rats and monkeys (Forgue et al, 1987), rabbits (Goudah et al, 2006;Abd El-Aty et al, 2007;Rule et al, 2010), horses (Guglick et al, 1998), foals and dogs (Gardner and Papich, 2001), cow calves (Ismail, 2005b;Patel et al, 2006;Pawar and Sharma, 2008;Patel et al, 2012), ewe (Ismail, 2005a ), goats (El-Rabbat et al, 2010;Rule et al, 2001;Bhavsar et al, 2008;Prawez et al, 2010;El-Hewaity, 2014), bull camels (Goudah et al, 2009), sheep (Patel et al, 2010) and buffalo calves (Joshi and Sharma 2007;Joshi and Sharma 2009). Currently, there are no available data on the pharmacokinetics of cefepime in broiler chickens.…”

Effect of Andrographolide Co-Administration on Pharmacokinetics of Meloxicam in Rats

“…So effect of using common medicine in combination with modern pharmaceuticals like meloxicam remains to be verified (Ernst, 1998;Patel et al, 2015;Ratndeep et al, 2009). Looking to this background this study was planned to evaluate effect of andrographolide co-administration on pharmacokinetics of meloxicam in rats.…”