PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 937776

Hydrodynamic models for diffusion in microporous membranes.

E N Lightfoot·J B Bassingthwaighte·E F Grabowski
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

DiffusionMathematicsMembranes, ArtificialModels, TheoreticalPhysical PhenomenaPhysicsSurface PropertiesComparative StudyJournal ArticleResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E N Lightfoot, J B Bassingthwaighte, E F Grabowski. 1976. Hydrodynamic models for diffusion in microporous membranes.. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02363560

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1992

Endotoxin transfer through dialysis membranes: small- versus large-pore membranes.

In this in-vivo study, dialysate and serum endotoxin was evaluated before and after haemodialysis with small-pore (PS400) and large-pore (PS600) polysulphone dialysers, and before and after haemodiafiltration with the PS600 filter. The source of the endotoxin was the presence in dialysate of Pseudomonads at a concentration of 10(3)-10(4) CFU/ml. Endotoxin was measured by a modified chromogenic limulus amoebocyte lysate (LAL) assay. In spite of dialysate endotoxin concentrations greater than 100 pg/ml, no changes in pre- versus posttreatment LAL reactivity were observed in PS400 dialysis and PS600 haemodiafiltration. In contrast, PS600 haemodialysis was related to an increase in serum LAL reactivity from 1.3 +/- 1.5 to 3.8 +/- 2.0 pg/ml (n = 15, P less than 0.01), and five patients (33.3%) showed a post-dialysis value in excess of 5 pg/ml. Our data are consistent with the absence of in-vivo endotoxin transfer during haemodialysis with small-pore dialyser membranes, and during haemodiafiltration with membranes with larger pores. An increase in LAL reactivity during haemodialysis with membranes with larger pores is, however, present, presumably due to the occurrence of backdiffusion/filtration with that specific strategy.

Diffusion↗
PubMed1992

Quantitative analysis of lidocaine hydrochloride delivery by diffusion across tissue expander membranes.

Permeability of Silastic tissue expander shells to lidocaine was studied to investigate the feasibility of intraluminal lidocaine injection for pain relief during soft-tissue expansion. Both intact expanders and an apparatus using isolated Silastic membrane segments were used to partition solutions of various lidocaine concentrations, and the rate of diffusion was quantitatively measured using a fluorescence polarization immunoassay. Lidocaine flux was found to follow Fick's law of passive diffusion with respect to time, surface area, and concentration gradient for the first 9 hours, with a permeability coefficient of 10.3 +/- 2.6 micrograms (h.cm2.percent)-1 (mean +/- SD) and diffusion coefficient of 7.5 x 10(-7) cm2/min for an average membrane thickness of 473 +/- 23 microns. After 9 hours, the lidocaine flux decreased exponentially, although the concentration gradient across the membrane remained essentially the same order of magnitude. Plasma proteins in the outer bathing solution and methylparaben used as a preservative in the standard lidocaine formulation had no influence on the change in transport flux with time. At the end of the linear portion of the diffusion curve, less than 2 percent of the total intraluminal lidocaine had crossed the membrane. Potential toxicity in the event of implant rupture limits the maximum total lidocaine dose to approximately 500 mg within an expander at any one time. Within these limits, the capacity for lidocaine delivery of 500 mg lidocaine by a 640-cc tissue expander would be only 6 mg during the first 9 hours after administration.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Diffusion↗