The wet dream of every pharmaceutical technician.
Interesting read. That is a solid study, a lot of what we learned in technology. Things that stuck out to me:
- The transport through the lymphatic system is very interesting. Lag time then could be reduced by lymph drainage. Wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense to do routinely but would be nice to try out if people get higher concentrations in the blood that way.
Another approach to verify the suggested mechanism would be to change the lymphatic flow. Two studies report a raised lymph flow (measured as albumin clearance rate) in the lymphatic vessels of the vastus lateralis muscle during exercise (100) or during massage (rabbits) (101). However, Soni et al. (79) described no increased absorption of fluphenazine after exercise or massage from a fluphenazine decanoate sesame oil depot, injected in the tight and buttock skeletal muscle. Clearly, there is no unambiguous explanation for the observed differences at this moment. Future studies on this subject should provide clarity.
I just saw that they reported on my speculation in the study. Seems to be inconclusive at this point.
- The split up into smaller depots increases the relative area were it can diffuse. This means that in spite of the area getting smaller overall, the relative area per mg oil solution increases. Therefore the decrease in oil volume in the muscle gets faster and faster. This is seen in the study with patient A but not C and D.
First, it can be speculated that the surface areas of the depots were different in the three muscles because of differences in spreading. The larger the surface, the larger the total mass flux (Φ”). Unfortunately, the surface areas of injected oil depots are unknown. This has been a reason for us to start a study to visualise the fate of oil when injected in muscles, results of which will be reported later. The role of surface area may also be relevant for the s.c. injection; the absorption was significantly lower, which can be attributed to the smaller surface area of the depot as it is likely that the shear forces in subcutaneous tissue are substantially lower than those in muscles.
As a result of this shape, the determined surface area is much larger than that of a perfect sphere that is used in mathematical models. Although the surface areas were approximately the same in all volunteers directly after injection, this was not the case in the successive days. Furthermore, the oil depot disappearance from the injection site is very variable between patients after i.m. injection. In all cases, the oil depot was disappeared from the injection site within 14 days.
And this is the reason why. As with everything related to the humane body, it’s individual. But there’s also a reason for why the trend goes in the opposite direction
The obvious explanation for this is that the surface area of the separate droplets is apparently of minor importance. In this respect, it can be argued that the drug release rate is determined by the outer-layer of the assembly of small droplets, encapsulated at the injection site (as seen in Figure 5.3F); Consequently, the droplets in the centre of the fragmented oil depot have minor contribution to the drug release rate.
- The oil depot dissolved into very small droplets in the muscle and stays there for a long time.
As earlier indicated, we have previously shown that the release characteristics of a ND oil depot differed between the muscles (Figure 5.1). The current study shows that this cannot be explained by the results obtained with MRI as these suggest that there is no significant difference between the oil depot surface area nor the disappearance rate from the injection site in the different sites of administration (Figure 5.2). Furthermore, there seems to be a discrepancy between the oil disappearance rate and the exposure of the active substances in clinical studies. Two independent clinical studies with 1.0 mL ND oil depots showed that the nandrolone levels persisted for at least two-three weeks (30,32). These oil depots were either injected into the deltoid muscle or the vastus lateralis. As already suggested in our previous paper, it is possible that the injected oil depot is dispersed in time into fine oil droplets with volumes <0.05 mL which are invisible for the MRI assessment. As a result, the oil depot seems to be disappeared, but is actually still present as small droplets.
Combining the results from both approaches, it can be concluded that the oil depot does not represent a discrete, continuous phase but is dispersed into separate droplets. This occurs already in the first few days. Clearly, the oil is still present after a month,
albeit that it may consist of a dispersion of small droplets.
So people who got problems with Deca here’s something interesting for you. The Deca stays AT THE INJECTION SITE FOR A LONG TIME. It does not only stay in other compartments in the body but where you would search for it first. So if you get deca dick, theres a reason for why it takes weeks to get better even if you stop right away. @blshaw reported 6 weeks of I remember correctly.
From: https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/90/5/2624/2836761
The peak serum concentration was reached after 30 h (50 and 100 mg) and 72 h (150 mg), whereas the terminal half-life was 7–12 d. In urine, pretreatment concentrations of 19-norandrosterone (19-NA) and/or 19-noretiocholanolone (19-NE) were detected in five of 37 subjects (14%). In the 50-mg group, 19-NA and/or 19-NE could be detected at least until 33 d after injection in 16 of 17 subjects (94%). In the 150-mg group, who were presumed to have not previously used nandrolone, nandrolone metabolites could be detected for up to 6 months in eight of 12 subjects (67%) for 19-NE and in 10 of 12 subjects (83%) for 19-NA.
Shows similar results.
- Local reactions are completely normal and shouldn’t worry users. Nice picture here.
- They got to inject grannies with Nandrolone. How this got approved by the ethics committee should be investigated haha