1980
DOI: 10.1007/bf00570165
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relative bioavailability of a paracetamol suppository

Abstract: The relative bioavailability of a new paracetamol suppository (Panodil) and tablets in doses of 0.5 and 1 g was investigated in eight healthy subjects. The tablets were absorbed faster and higher peak plasma concentrations were obtained than after the suppositories. The bioavailability of the suppositories was approximately 80% of that of the tablets at both dose levels. There was no indication of capacity-limited elimination at either the two doses investigated.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
17
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is in accordance with the results of Seideman et al (5). They found that the bioavailability of suppositories (Panodil 500 mg) was approximately 80% when compared to the corresponding tablet formulation.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 82%
“…This is in accordance with the results of Seideman et al (5). They found that the bioavailability of suppositories (Panodil 500 mg) was approximately 80% when compared to the corresponding tablet formulation.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 82%
“…Imprecision in paracetamol from this rectal formulation has not been determined. Seideman et al report [34] a relative bioavailability of paracetamol from suppositories of 80% that from oral formulations. In addition, rectal absorption is erratic and variability in bioavailability can range from 24 to 98% (mean 52%) of oral tablets [35].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rectal route has the potential to partially reduce first pass hepatic loss by draining into the inferior and middle haemorrhoidal veins. Bioavailability strongly depends on site of absorption within the rectum [33, 34]. The impact of the rectal venous drainage pattern is questionable, given the degree of rectal venous anastomotic channels, slow absorption times and natural attrition from the rectum.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%