PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R Raja

Publications and source records attributed to R Raja.

66 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1978

Hemoperfusion with uncoated amberlite XE-336 resin in normal and uremic dogs.

Amberlite XE-336 is a pyrolized polystyrene resin with an adsorptive spectrum similar to activated charcoal. 5 normal (group I) and 5 uremic (group II) dogs had 6 h of hemoperfusion with a 400-gram column of Amberlite XE-336 resin with a blood flow rate of 300 ml/min. In group II during 0, 0.5, 1, 3, and 6 h of hemoperfusion the mean column clearances of creatinine were 273 +/- 10, 224 +/- 7, 177 +/- 8, 125 +/- 30, and 64 +/- 17 ml/min and the serum creatinine concentration decreased from 10.4 +/- 1.3 to 3.2 +/- 0.9 mg/dl. In one of the uremic dogs the column clearance of middle molecules measured at 0, 0,5, 1, 3, and 6 h of hemoperfusion was 273,258,101,109, and 23 ml/min. The side reactions in group I and II hemoperfusion studies included transient hypotension, hypocalcemia, leukopenia and a reduction in platelet count.

Adsorption↗
PubMed1977

Effect of hemoperfusion of clearance of gentamicin, cephalothin, and clindamycon from plasma of normal dogs.

Nine normal dogs were divided into three groups of three. Group 1 was given an overdose of gentamicin; group 2, cephalothin; and group 3, clindamycin. Group 1 had hemoperfusion with Amberlite XE-336, and groups 2 and 3 with Amberlite XAD-4 resin adsorbents, for 6 hr with a blood flow rate of 300 ml/min. The plasma clearance and removal rates of antibiotics by the hemoperfusion columns were high. The clearance rate of gentamicin from plasma (mean +/- standard deviation) ranged from 59 +/- 30 to 199 +/- 6 ml/min, of cephalothin from 66 +/- 14 to 157 +/- 8 ml/min, and of clindamycin from 55 +/- 9 to 125 +/- 16 ml/min. Of the total dose of antibiotic administered, the hemoperfusion columns removed 67% from theplasma in group 1, 41% in group 2, and 18% in group 3. The fact that antibiotics may be rapidly removed from the blood during hemoperfusion should be considered in calculation of the therapeutic dose of antibiotic required for patients who receive this preocedure. Also, hemoperfusion can effectively and rapidly remove certain antibiotics from the blood of patients who have had a potentially toxic overdose.

Animals↗
PubMed1976

Resin hemoperfusion for acute drug intoxication.

Eight patients with drug intoxication were hemoperfused on ten occasions at a blood-flow rate of 300 ml/min with a 650gm column of Amberlite XAD-4 resin, which is a macroreticular resin with a specific adsorptive attraction for lipid-soluble organic molecules. Column clearances of glutethimide and a variety of barbiturates ranged from 207 to 300 ml/min for treatment sessions extending from 2 1/2 to ten hours. After ingestion of 75 gm of glutethimide, one patient received hemoperfusion on three successive days for nine, ten, and eight hours, respectively. She recovered after the column removed over 30 gm of drug. The patients demonstrated dramatic clinical responses with no evidence of meaningful toxic reactions. Column hemoperfusion with Amberlite XAD-4 resin was simpler and more effective than any known method of removing barbiturates and glutethimide from the blood of patients with drug overdoses.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Erythropoietin with oral iron in peritoneal and hemodialysis patients. A comparison in an inner city population.

Studies on the comparative efficacy of erythropoietin (rHuEPO) in chronic hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are scarce. The authors compared the use of rHuEPO in 74 stable patients on hemodialysis with 24 on chronic peritoneal dialysis. All patients were on oral iron supplements. In PD patients, hematocrits were 23.1 and 30.1%, rHuEPO dose 80.9 and 89.0 U/kg/wk, whereas in HD patients, hematocrits were 21.2 and 27.5 and rHuEPO dose was 140.2 and 165.0 U/kg/wk at initiation and 6 months, respectively. Serum iron and transferrin saturations were unchanged in peritoneal, but decreased in hemodialysis patients on rHuEPO therapy. These findings suggest that rHuEPO is more effective in peritoneal dialysis patients than in hemodialysis patients receiving oral iron. The improved efficacy of rHuEPO in peritoneal dialysis may be due to decreased blood loss, subcutaneous administration, or better removal of inhibitors of erythropoiesis. Peritoneal dialysis may be more cost effective and desirable than hemodialysis for rHuEPO dependent or resistant patients.

Administration, Oral↗