Article citationsMore>>

Gorden, P.J., Ydstie, J.A., Kleinhenz, M.D., Brick, T.A., Smith, J.S., Griffith, R.W., Wulf, L.W., Rajewski, S.M., Zhang, M., Sidhu, P.K., Mochel, J.P. and Coetzee, J.F. (2018) Comparative Plasma and Interstitial Fluid Pharmacokinetics and Tissue Residues of Ceftiofur Crystalline-Free Acid in Cattle with Induced Coliform Mastitis. Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 41, 848-860.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jvp.12688

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: The Effect of Delivery Method on the Pharmacokinetic Properties of Meloxicam in Pre-Weaned Dairy Calves with Diarrhea

  AUTHORS: Daniel Shock, Steven Roche, Denis Nagel, Merle Olson

  KEYWORDS: Meloxicam, Dairy Calves, Pharmacokinetics, Diarrhea, Anti-Inflammatory

  JOURNAL NAME: Open Journal of Veterinary Medicine, Vol.10 No.3, February 28, 2020

  ABSTRACT: The non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug meloxicam is commonly used as adjunct therapy for neonatal calf diarrhea to control pain and inflammation. The objective of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of meloxicam in diarrheic pre-ruminant dairy calves dosed either orally or subcutaneously. Twelve pre-ruminant male dairy calves with mild to moderate diarrhea were randomly assigned to receive one of four treatments (three per group): subcutaneous meloxicam (SM, 0.5 mg/kg body weight); an oral bolus meloxicam suspension (OM, 1 mg/kg body weight); an oral meloxicam suspension added to a feeding of oral electrolytes (EM, 1 mg/kg body weight); and an oral meloxicam suspension added to a feeding of milk replacer (MM, 1 mg/kg body weight). The predicted pharmacokinetic parameters for OM, MM, EM, and SM groups were: half-life (56.8 ± 21.7 vs. 136.0 ± 26.6 vs. 85.2 ± 21.7 vs. 36.3 ± 21.7 h), Cmax (4.3 ± 0.4 vs. 3.7 ± 0.4 vs. 3.9 ± 0.4 vs. 2.1 ± 0.4 μg/mL), Tmax (13.3 ± 4.0 vs. 10.7 ± 4.0 vs. 13.3 ± 4.0 vs. 2.7 ± 4.0 h), and AUC0-∞ (383.4 ± 126.8 vs. 877.8 ± 155.3 vs. 457.1 ± 126.8 vs. 126.4 ± 126.8 h * μg/mL). Oral meloxicam, especially MM, had extended elimination phases relative to SM. All meloxicam therapies provided effective therapeutic levels but all oral therapies (1 mg/kg) provided longer durations of activity than injectable meloxicam (0.5 mg/kg).