Lipophilicity affects the pharmacokinetics and toxicity of local anaesthetic agents administered by caudal block
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Drugs administered into the epidural space by caudal block are cleared by means of a process potentially affected by the lipophilic character of the compounds. 2. In the present study, we examined the relationship between the octanol-water partition coefficient (log Poct) and the time to reach the maximum plasma drug concentration (tmax) of lignocaine, bupivacaine and ropivacaine administered by caudal block in paediatric patients. We also examined the relationship between log Poct and the toxicity of these local anaesthetic agents in experimental models. The tmax and toxicity data were obtained from the literature. 3. Ropivacaine, with a log Poct of 2.9, exhibited a tmax of 61.6 min. The tmax of lignocaine, with a log Poct of 2.4, and bupivacaine, with a log Poct of with 3.4, were approximately 50% shorter than ropivacaine. At log Poct of approximately 3.0, the toxicity of these local anaesthetic agents was substantially increased. The relationship between log Poct and the convulsive effect in dogs was similar to the relationship between log Poct and the lethal dose in sheep. 4. With local anaesthetic agents, it appears that the relationship between log Poct and drug transfer from the epidural space to the blood stream is parabolic, being the slowest rate of transference at log Poct 3.0. Toxicity, due to plasma availability of these local anaesthetic agents, seems to be increased at log Poct equal or higher than 3.0 secondary to the highest transfer from plasma into the central nervous system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".