Background For several years, many infusion systems have been marketed for the administration of antineoplastic drugs (AD).
Purpose To compare the ability of these devices to deliver the expected volume of antineoplastic drug in solution.
Material and methods Seven infusion devices were assessed (see table 1) by simulated infusions with a radiotracer (99mTcO4 −) as drug substitute. The same activity (370 MBq) was diluted in 250 mL 0.9% NaCl bags. The evolution of the drug concentration at the egress of the infusion system was recorded continuously with a sodium iodine crystal detector. The area-under-curve of drug concentration according to time of both administration (AUCadm) and rinsing (AUCrin) steps were calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule after correcting for radioactivity decay. The rinsing volumes (Vrin), volumes required to get no more radioactivity, were measured in a graduated test tube. The values were compared using a Kruskall-Wallis test (p < 0.05).
Results Despite the differences in dead-space volume, AUCadm were not significantly different (see table 1). The rinsing volumes were significantly different between the tested devices, ranging between 46.8 ± 5.7 mL and 92.2 ± 8.9 mL.
Conclusion The rinsing conditions required to administer the same dose are really different between devices. The impact of good handling practice of these devices has to be assessed on the pharmacokinetic parameters.
Kontny NE, Boos J, Würthwein G, et al. Minimization of the preanalytical error in pharmacokinetic analyses and therapeutic drug monitoring: focus on IV drug administration. Ther Drug Monit 2012;34:460–6
ReferenceNo conflict of interest.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.