English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background:  Emulsified isoflurane is a novel intravenous general anesthetic obtained by encapsulating isoflurane molecules into emulsion. The formulation of emulsion has been improved according to the latest regulations of the China Food and Drug Administration. This study was designed to compare the bioequivalence of the new and previous formulation emulsion of isoflurane.    Methods:  In a single-center, single-dose, double-blinded, randomized, two-period crossover study, healthy volunteers received intravenous injection of 30 mg/kg of isoflurane with either previous formulation of emulsion isoflurane (PFEI) or new formulation of emulsion isoflurane (NFEI). Arterial and venous blood samples were obtained for geometric mean test/reference ratios of C max , AUC 0-t , and AUC 0-∞,  as well as their 90% confidence interval (CI90) as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes were safety measurements such as vital signs, 12-lead electrocardiography, adverse effects, and laboratory tests; and anesthesia efficacy was assessed by Modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score, bispectral index (BIS), and loss/recovery of eyelash reflex.    Results:  24 subjects were eligible, of which 21 completed the whole experiment (NFEI n = 21, PFEI n = 23). Arterial geometric mean test/reference ratios of C max , AUC 0-t , and AUC 0-∞  were 104.50% (CI90 92.81%–117.65%), 108.23% (94.51%–123.96%), and 106.53% (93.94%∼120.80%), respectively. The most commonly seen adverse effects for NFEI and PFEI were injection pain (38.1% vs. 34.8%), hypotension (19.0% vs. 13.0%), apnea (14.3% vs. 17.4%), and upper airway obstruction (14.3% vs. 13.0%). No severe adverse effect was observed. The effectiveness of general anesthesia was similar between the two formulations.    Conclusion:  The CI90 of C max , AUC 0-t , AUC 0-∞ , NFEI, and PFEI were within the range of 80%–125%, suggesting bioequivalence between NFEI and PFEI. The safety and anesthesia effectiveness were also similar.

frontiers in pharmacology

The Bioequivalence of Emulsified Isoflurane With a New Formulation of Emulsion: A Single-Center, Single-Dose, Double-Blinded, Randomized, Two-Period Crossover Study