Kinoshita Masako, Yamagishi Rina, Iizaka Yohei, Takigawa Masaki, Anzai Yojiro, Urano Atsushi, Hirose Kaoru, Hanawa Takehisa, Tanaka Hiroyuki
Department of Clinical Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Toho University.
Department of Practical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Toho University.
Yakugaku Zasshi. 2024;144(9):887-896. doi: 10.1248/yakushi.24-00082.
Burow's solution is a 13% aluminum acetate solution used for treating chronic suppurative otitis media. However, multiple formulations for Burow's and neo-Burow's solutions are used as in-hospital preparations. Each formulation uses different types and amounts of reagents, and takes a different time to prepare. Thus, the ions, including aluminum ion (Al), and other molecules in the prepared Burow's and neo-Burow's solutions are not identical, and the pH also differs. Furthermore, details about the antibacterial activity of these preparations are unknown. This study evaluated the stability and antibacterial activity of four Burow's and two neo-Burow's solutions prepared using different methods. Preparation times ranged from 20 min to 3 d, and the pH ranged from 2.2 to 4, meaning some solutions were more acidic or more basic than the pH 3 devised by Burow. In addition, the Al concentrations ranged from 0.05 to 1.51 mol/L, meaning some solutions were more concentrated or diluted than 13% aluminum acetate (0.64 mol/L). One of the Burow's solutions we prepared produced a white residue after 14 d, making it difficult to ensure stability. In addition, confirming the antibacterial activity of another Burow's solution against the test bacteria was problematic. Despite the differences in pH and Al concentrations between the various Burow's and neo-Burow's solutions, the antibacterial activity was equivalent. It was considered necessary to use the basic data obtained in this study to select a formulation for each hospital. Evaluation of the antibacterial activity of each formulation in clinical settings will be a subject for future study.
布罗溶液是一种13%的醋酸铝溶液,用于治疗慢性化脓性中耳炎。然而,布罗溶液和新布罗溶液有多种配方用作医院制剂。每种配方使用不同类型和数量的试剂,制备所需时间也不同。因此,所制备的布罗溶液和新布罗溶液中的离子(包括铝离子(Al))及其他分子并不相同,pH值也存在差异。此外,这些制剂的抗菌活性细节尚不清楚。本研究评估了用不同方法制备的四种布罗溶液和两种新布罗溶液的稳定性和抗菌活性。制备时间从20分钟到3天不等,pH值范围为2.2至4,这意味着一些溶液比布罗设计的pH值3更酸或更碱。此外,铝浓度范围为0.05至1.51mol/L,这意味着一些溶液比13%的醋酸铝(0.64mol/L)更浓或更稀。我们制备的一种布罗溶液在14天后产生了白色残留物,难以确保其稳定性。此外,确认另一种布罗溶液对测试细菌的抗菌活性也存在问题。尽管各种布罗溶液和新布罗溶液在pH值和铝浓度上存在差异,但其抗菌活性相当。认为有必要利用本研究获得的基础数据为各医院选择一种配方。在临床环境中评估每种配方的抗菌活性将是未来研究的一个课题。