Cargando…
Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh
Parenteral routes of drug administration are often selected to optimize actual dose of drug delivered, assure high bioavailability, bypass first-pass metabolism or harsh gastrointestinal environments, as well as maximize the speed of onset. Intramuscular (IM) delivery can be preferred to intravenous...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4976900/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27536164 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S83406 |
_version_ | 1782446933979168768 |
---|---|
author | Hill, Robert L Wilmot, John G Belluscio, Beth A Cleary, Kevin Lindisch, David Tucker, Robin Wilson, Emmanuel Shukla, Rajesh B |
author_facet | Hill, Robert L Wilmot, John G Belluscio, Beth A Cleary, Kevin Lindisch, David Tucker, Robin Wilson, Emmanuel Shukla, Rajesh B |
author_sort | Hill, Robert L |
collection | PubMed |
description | Parenteral routes of drug administration are often selected to optimize actual dose of drug delivered, assure high bioavailability, bypass first-pass metabolism or harsh gastrointestinal environments, as well as maximize the speed of onset. Intramuscular (IM) delivery can be preferred to intravenous delivery when initiating intravenous access is difficult or impossible. Drugs can be injected intramuscularly using a syringe or an automated delivery device (autoinjector). Investigation into the IM delivery dynamics of these methods may guide further improvements in the performance of injection technologies. Two porcine model studies were conducted to compare differences in dispersion of injectate volume for different methods of IM drug administration. The first study compared the differences in the degree of dispersion and uptake of injectate following the use of a manual syringe and an autoinjector. The second study compared the spatial spread of the injected formulation, or dispersion volume, and uptake of injectate following the use of five different autoinjectors (EpiPen(®) [0.3 mL], EpiPen(®) Jr [0.3 mL], Twinject(®) [0.15 mL, 0.3 mL], and Anapen(®) 300 [0.3 mL]) with varying needle length, needle gauge, and force applied to the plunger. In the first study, the autoinjector provided higher peak volumes of injectate, indicating a greater degree of dispersion, compared with manual syringe delivery. In the second study, EpiPen autoinjectors resulted in larger dispersion volumes and higher initial dispersion ratios, which decreased rapidly over time, suggesting a greater rate of uptake of injectate than the other autoinjectors. The differences in dispersion and uptake of injectate are likely the result of different functional characteristics of the delivery systems. Both studies demonstrate that the functional characteristics of the method for delivering IM injections impact the dispersion and uptake of the material injected, which could significantly affect the pharmacokinetics and, ultimately, the effectiveness of the drug. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4976900 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49769002016-08-17 Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh Hill, Robert L Wilmot, John G Belluscio, Beth A Cleary, Kevin Lindisch, David Tucker, Robin Wilson, Emmanuel Shukla, Rajesh B Med Devices (Auckl) Original Research Parenteral routes of drug administration are often selected to optimize actual dose of drug delivered, assure high bioavailability, bypass first-pass metabolism or harsh gastrointestinal environments, as well as maximize the speed of onset. Intramuscular (IM) delivery can be preferred to intravenous delivery when initiating intravenous access is difficult or impossible. Drugs can be injected intramuscularly using a syringe or an automated delivery device (autoinjector). Investigation into the IM delivery dynamics of these methods may guide further improvements in the performance of injection technologies. Two porcine model studies were conducted to compare differences in dispersion of injectate volume for different methods of IM drug administration. The first study compared the differences in the degree of dispersion and uptake of injectate following the use of a manual syringe and an autoinjector. The second study compared the spatial spread of the injected formulation, or dispersion volume, and uptake of injectate following the use of five different autoinjectors (EpiPen(®) [0.3 mL], EpiPen(®) Jr [0.3 mL], Twinject(®) [0.15 mL, 0.3 mL], and Anapen(®) 300 [0.3 mL]) with varying needle length, needle gauge, and force applied to the plunger. In the first study, the autoinjector provided higher peak volumes of injectate, indicating a greater degree of dispersion, compared with manual syringe delivery. In the second study, EpiPen autoinjectors resulted in larger dispersion volumes and higher initial dispersion ratios, which decreased rapidly over time, suggesting a greater rate of uptake of injectate than the other autoinjectors. The differences in dispersion and uptake of injectate are likely the result of different functional characteristics of the delivery systems. Both studies demonstrate that the functional characteristics of the method for delivering IM injections impact the dispersion and uptake of the material injected, which could significantly affect the pharmacokinetics and, ultimately, the effectiveness of the drug. Dove Medical Press 2016-08-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4976900/ /pubmed/27536164 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S83406 Text en © 2016 Hill et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. Permissions beyond the scope of the License are administered by Dove Medical Press Limited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Hill, Robert L Wilmot, John G Belluscio, Beth A Cleary, Kevin Lindisch, David Tucker, Robin Wilson, Emmanuel Shukla, Rajesh B Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh |
title | Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh |
title_full | Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh |
title_fullStr | Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh |
title_short | Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh |
title_sort | comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4976900/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27536164 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S83406 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hillrobertl comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh AT wilmotjohng comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh AT bellusciobetha comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh AT clearykevin comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh AT lindischdavid comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh AT tuckerrobin comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh AT wilsonemmanuel comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh AT shuklarajeshb comparisonofdrugdeliverywithautoinjectorversusmanualprefilledsyringeandbetweenthreedifferentautoinjectordevicesadministeredinpigthigh |