INFLUENCE OF HYDRATED SODIUM CALCIUM ALUMINOSILICATE AND ACTIVATED CHARCOAL ON THE PHARMACOKINETICS OF SINGLE PULSE DOSING OF ENROFLOXACIN IN BROILER CHICKEN

  • Mekala P Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
  • Jagadeeswaran A Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
  • Arivuchelvan A Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
  • Nanjappan K Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
  • Gopala Krishna Murthy Tr Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Objective: The present study was undertaken to evaluate the interaction kinetics of enrofloxacin, the commonly used antibacterial in poultry with
mycotoxin binders namely hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate (HSCAS) and activated charcoal (AC), which have become inevitable components
of poultry feed.
Methods: Control group received normal feed free of toxin binder, whereas HSCAS and AC group were supplemented with HSCAS and AC at 0.5% in
feed, respectively. Enrofloxacin was administered as single pulse dose (at 10 mg/kg) through drinking water to all the groups. Blood samples were
collected at predetermined time intervals after drug administration, and plasma was separated and analyzed for enrofloxacin concentrations using
high-performance liquid chromatography.
Results: Significant decrease in area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC
0-∞
)
was noticed in AC group when compared to control group
(13.90±1.15 vs. 19.67±1.68 mg.h/ml), whereas HSCAS group (16.42±1.24 mg.h/ml) neither differed significantly from AC nor control group. The
volume of distribution and clearance were significantly high in AC group when compared to control group (8.31±0.89 vs. 6.39±0.13 l/kg; 0.77±0.07 vs.
0.53±0.05 l/h/kg). HSCAS group was intermediate and did not differ significantly from the other two groups (8.13±0.45 l/kg; 0.63±0.04 l/h/kg).
However, volume of distribution at steady state was significantly high in both AC (10.42±1.09 l/kg) and HSCAS group (9.45±0.48 l/kg) when compared
to control group (7.21±0.20 l/kg). Maximum plasma concentration


was significantly low (0.99±0.04, 0.97±0.06, 1.38±0.04 mg/ml) and time to reach
maximum plasma concentration was significantly delayed (7.33±0.42, 6.67±0.67, 4.33±0.67 h) in AC and HSCAS group when compared to control
group, respectively. The relative bioavailability was significantly low in both AC and HSCAS group (74.95±10.70, 88.88±15.03%) when compared
to control group. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic integration revealed that the dose of enrofloxacin (10 mg/kg) was capable of treating only
moderately sensitive organisms (minimum inhibitory concentration ≤0.125 mg/ml) both in the presence and absence of toxin binder and higher
dosage is needed for the less sensitive organism.
Conclusion: The study revealed that the administration of enrofloxacin to HSCAS and AC supplemented broilers would lead to decrease in clinical
efficacy and promote the development of antimicrobial resistance. AC was found to interact more with enrofloxacin than HSCAS as observed from
the PK parameters. Hence, careful adjustment of dosage or withdrawal of the usage of toxin binder containing either HSCAS or AC in feed during
enrofloxacin treatment is recommended.
Keywords: Enrofloxacin, Pulse dosing, Hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate, Activated charcoal, Interaction kinetics.

Author Biographies

Mekala P, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University

Assistant Professor,

Department of Veterinary Pharmacology and Toxicology

 
Jagadeeswaran A, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University

Professor and Head,

Department of Veteinary Pharmacology and Toxicology

Arivuchelvan A, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University

Assistant Professor,

Department of Veterinary Pharmacology and Toxicology

Nanjappan K, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University

Professor and Head,

Department of Veterinary Physiology

Gopala Krishna Murthy Tr, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University

Professor and Head,

Poultry Disease Diagnosis and Surveillance Laboratory

References

REFERENCES
1. Sheer M. Studies on the antibacterial activity of Baytril
. Vet Med Rev
1987;2(1):90-9.
®
2. Avantaggiato G, Solfrizzo M, Visconti A. Recent advances on the use of
adsorbent materials for detoxification of Fusarium mycotoxins. Food
Addit Contam 2005;22(4):379-88.
3. EC (European Commission). Commission Regulation 386/2009/EC of
12 May 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European
Parliament and of the Council as regards the establishment of a new
functional group of feed additives. Off J Eur Union L 2009;118:66.
4. EFSA. Statement on the establishment of guidelines for the assessment
of additives from the Functional Group ‘substances for reduction of the
contamination of feed by Mycotoxins’. EFSA J 2010;8:1693.
5. Phillips TD, Kubena LF, Harvey RB, Taylor DR, Heidelbaugh ND.
Mycotoxin hazards in agriculture: New approach to control. J Am Vet
Med Assoc 1987;190:1617.
6. Huwig A, Freimund S, Käppeli O, Dutler H. Mycotoxin detoxication of
animal feed by different adsorbents. Toxicol Lett 2001;122(2):179-88.
7. Sabater-Vilar M, Malekinejad H, Selman MH, van der Doelen MA,
Fink-Gremmels J. In vitro assessment of adsorbents aiming to prevent
deoxynivalenol and zearalenone mycotoxicoses. Mycopathologia
2007;163(2):81-90.
8. Küng K, Riond JL, Wolffram S, Wanner M. Comparison of an HPLC
and bioassay method to determine antimicrobial concentrations after
intravenous and oral administration of enrofloxacin in four dogs. Res
Vet Sci 1993;54(2):247-8.
9. Nielsen P, Gyrd-Hansen N. Bioavailability of enrofloxacin after
oral administration to fed and fasted pigs. Pharmacol Toxicol
1997;80(5):246-50.
10. Shah VP, Midha KK, Findlay JW, Hill HM, Hulse JD, McGilveray IJ,
et al. Bioanalytical method validation – A revisit with a decade of
progress. Pharm Res 2000;17(12):1551-7.
226
Asian J Pharm Clin Res, Vol 9, Issue 1, 2016, 223-227
Mekala et al.
11. Singh B. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis of plasma level
data through statistical moments approach: A worksheet instance.
In: Malik JK, editor. ICAR Short Course on Recent Approaches in
Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Therapeutic Monitoring of Drugs in
Farm Animals. Izatnagar, India: IVRI; 1999. p. 36-8.
12. Usansky JI, Desai A, Tang-Liu D. PK Functions for Microsoft
Excel. Irvine, CA, USA: Department of Pharmacokinetics and Drug
Metabolism Allergan; 2011.
13. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical Methods. 8
ed. Ames, Iowa:
Iowa State University Press; 1994.
th
14. Kramer CY. Extension of multiple range tests to group correlated
adjusted means. Biometrics 1957;13:13-8. Available from: http//:www.
dx.doi:10.2307/3001898. [Last accessed on 2014 Mar 16].
15. Ganiere JP, Hervouet P, Delaporte J, Froyman R. Serum kinetics of
enrofloxacin in chicken during continuous drinking water medication.
J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1997;20 Suppl 1:202-3.
16. Intorre L, Mengozzi G, Bertini S, Bagliacca M, Luchetti E, Soldani G. The
plasma kinetics and tissue distribution of enrofloxacin and its metabolite
ciprofloxacin in the Muscovy duck. Vet Res Commun 1997;21(2):127-36.
17. García Ovando H, Gorla N, Luders C, Poloni G, Errecalde C, Prieto G,
et al. Comparative pharmacokinetics of enrofloxacin and ciprofloxacin
in chickens. J Vet Pharmacol Ther 1999;22(3):209-12.
18. Jakubowski P, Jaroszewski JJ, Grabowski T, Markiewicz W, Maslanka T.
Determination of enrofloxacin in chicken plasma by high performance
liquid chromatography for pharmacokinetic studies. Acta Veterinaria
(Beograd) 2010; 60: 563-72.
19. Tripathi KD, editor. Pharmacokinetics: Membrane transport, absorption
and distribution of drugs. Essentials of Medical Pharmacology.
New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers; 2009. p. 18.
20. Levy G. Gastrointestinal clearance of drugs with activated charcoal.
N Engl J Med 1982;307:676-8.
21. Torre D, Sampietro C, Quadrelli C, Bianchi W, Maggiolo F Effects of
orally administered activated charcoal on ciprofloxacin pharmacokinetics
in healthy volunteers. Chemioterapia 1988;7(6):382-6.
22. Yan W, Hu S, Jing C. Enrofloxacin sorption on smectite clays:
Effects of pH, cations, and humic acid. J Colloid Interface Sci
2012;372(1):141-7.
23. Wan M, Li Z, Hong H, Wu Q. Enrofloxacin uptake and retention on
different types of clays. J Asian Earth Sci 2013;77:287-94.
24. Sharma PC, Jain A, Jain S. Fluoroquinolone antibacterials: A review
on chemistry, microbiology and therapeutic prospects. Acta Pol Pharm
2009;66(6):587-604.
25. Sumano LH, Gutierrez OL, Aguilera R, Rosiles MR, Bernard BM,
Gracia MJ. Influence of hard water on the bioavailability of enrofloxacin
in broilers. Poult Sci 2004;83(5):726-31.
26. Aguilera R, Gutiérrez OL, Sumano LH. Enhancement of enrofloxacin
serum antibacterial activity by calcium primed broilers. Res Vet Sci
2007;82(1):80-4.
27. García MT, Pelaz C, Giménez MJ, Aguilar L. In vitro activities of
gemifloxacin versus five quinolones and two macrolides against
271 Spanish isolates of Legionella pneumophila: Influence of
charcoal on susceptibility test results. Antimicrob Agents Chemother
2000;44(8):2176-8.
28. Eboka CJ, Afolabi AB. In vitro adsorption of fluoroquinolones on some
pharmaceutical adsorbents. Trop J Pharm Res 2006;5:533-8.
29. Stass H, Kubitza D, Möller JG, Delesen H. Influence of activated
charcoal on the pharmacokinetics of moxifloxacin following
intravenous and oral administration of a 400 mg single dose to healthy
males. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2005;59(4):536-41.
30. Andes D, Craig WA. Animal model pharmacokinetics and
pharmacodynamics: A critical review. Int J Antimicrob Agents
2002;19(5):261-8.
31. Abd el-Aziz MI, Aziz MA, Soliman FA, Afify NA. Pharmacokinetic
evaluation of enrofloxacin in chickens. Br Poult Sci 1997;38(2):164-8.
32. Randall LP, Cooles SW, Coldham NC, Stapleton KS. Modification of
enrofloxacin treatment regimens for poultry experimentally infected
with Salmonella enteric Serovar. Typhimurium DT 104 to minimize
selection of resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006;50:4030-7.
227
Statistics
236 Views | 413 Downloads
How to Cite
P, M., J. A, A. A, N. K, and G. K. M. Tr. “INFLUENCE OF HYDRATED SODIUM CALCIUM ALUMINOSILICATE AND ACTIVATED CHARCOAL ON THE PHARMACOKINETICS OF SINGLE PULSE DOSING OF ENROFLOXACIN IN BROILER CHICKEN”. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, Vol. 9, no. 1, Jan. 2016, pp. 223-7, https://innovareacademics.in/journals/index.php/ajpcr/article/view/9758.
Section
Original Article(s)