Antinociception by intrathecal midazolam involves endogenous neurotransmitters acting at spinal cord delta opioid receptors

Intrathecal midazolam causes antinociception by combining with spinal cord benzodiazepine receptors. This effect is reversible with doses of naloxone, suggesting involvement of spinal kappa or delta but not micrograms opioid receptors. The antinociceptive effects of intrathecally administered drugs in the spinal cord were demonstrated by measurements of the electrical current threshold for avoidance behaviour in rats with chronically implanted lumbar intrathecal catheters. A comparison was made of suppression by two opioid selective antagonists (nor- binaltorphimine (kappa selective) and naltrindole (delta selective)) of spinal antinociception caused by equipotent doses of opioids selective for different receptor subtypes (U-50488H (kappa), DSLET and DSBULET (delta), fentanyl (micrograms)) and the benzodiazepine midazolam. Nor- binaltorphimine selectively suppressed the effects of U-50488H but not midazolam or fentanyl. However, the delta selective antagonist, naltrindole, caused dose-related suppression of antinociception produced by both delta opioid agonists and midazolam with the same ED50 (0.5 nmol). We conclude that intrathecal midazolam caused spinally mediated antinociception in rats by a mechanism involving delta opioid receptor activation.      

Role of spinal opioid receptors in the antinociceptive interactions between intrathecal morphine and bupivacaine.

In studies on the clinical management of pain, a combination of morphine and bupivacaine is more effective than either of them alone in producing analgesia. The present study was designed to examine the effect of bupivacaine on morphine-induced antinociception as measured by the tail-flick test in the rat. To understand the basis of this interaction, the effect of bupivacaine on the binding of opioid ligands to their spinal opioid receptors in the rat also was investigated. Intrathecal administration of 5, 20, or 50 micrograms bupivacaine significantly potentiated the antinociception produced by intrathecal administration of 10 micrograms morphine. There was more than a 10-fold increase in the area under the curve (AUC0-60 min) for morphine-induced antinociception in the presence of bupivacaine. At higher doses of morphine (20 micrograms), bupivacaine was not very effective, increased AUC0-60 min for antinociception by only about 25%, and in fact significantly decreased the total duration of morphine-induced antinociception. Radioreceptor assays done with rat spinal cord membrane preparations revealed that bupivacaine (0.1-10 nM) inhibited the binding of specific ligands to mu-receptors but increased the binding to delta- and kappa-receptors. The authors conclude that the facilitation of morphine-induced antinociception by bupivacaine may be associated with a conformational change in the spinal opioid receptors induced by bupivacaine. Although increasing the binding of morphine to kappa-opioid receptors is the most prominent effect, the binding of opioid ligands to all spinal receptors is inhibited at high doses of bupivacaine.     

Reversal by naloxone of spinal antinociceptive effects of fentanyl, ketocyclazocine and midazolam.

Experiments using measurement of electrical-current threshold as a nociceptive test in the skin of the tail and neck in rats demonstrated that fentanyl, ketocyclazocine and midazolam caused spinally mediated antinociception when the drugs were administered intrathecally via chronically implanted lumbar subarachnoid catheters. The benzodiazepine antagonist flumazenil selectively suppressed the midazolam response, indicating that this benzodiazepine exerted its segmental antinociceptive effect via spinal-cord benzodiazepine receptors. Naloxone blocked the responses to both opioids and also midazolam. The dose of naloxone which suppressed the midazolam response was similar to that required to suppress the response to the kappa-opioid agonist. We suggest that the segmental antinociceptive effects of fentanyl and midazolam are mediated via different pathways; the benzodiazepine exerts its antinociceptive action via a spinal-cord opioid pathway which does not involve mu-receptors.     

Antinociceptive properties of neurosteroids: a comparison of alphadolone and alphaxalone in potentiation of opioid antinociception

In this study, we investigated the antinociceptive and sedative effects of the opioids fentanyl, morphine, and oxycodone given alone and in combination with two neurosteroids: alphadolone and alphaxalone. An open-field activity monitor and rotarod apparatus were used to define the sedative effects caused by opioid and neurosteroid compounds given alone intraperitoneally to male Wistar rats. Dose-response curves for antinociception were constructed using only nonsedative doses of these drugs. At nonsedating doses, fentanyl, morphine, and oxycodone all caused dose-dependent tail flick latency (TFL) antinociceptive effects. Because neither neurosteroid altered TFL, electrical current was used as the test to determine doses of neurosteroid that caused antinociceptive effects at nonsedative doses. Alphadolone 10 mg/kg intraperitoneally caused significant antinociceptive effects in the electrical test but alphaxalone did not. All three opioid dose-response curves for TFL antinociception were shifted to the left by coadministration of alphadolone even though alphadolone alone had no effect on TFL. Alphaxalone given alone had no antinociceptive effects at nonsedative doses and it had no effect on opioid antinociception. Neither neurosteroid caused sedative effects when combined with opioids. We conclude that coadministration of alphadolone, but not alphaxalone, with morphine, fentanyl, or oxycodone potentiates antinociception and that this effect is not caused by an increase in sedation.     

Local anesthetics potentiate spinal morphine antinociception

Some investigators have postulated a synergistic analgesic effect of local anesthetic agents and opiates when given intrathecally or epidurally, but little objective evidence has been presented to quantitate such an effect. A study was therefore undertaken to compare in mice the antinociceptive effects of intrathecal injections of mixtures of morphine with bupivacaine or lidocaine with the effects of these agents when administered alone. The antinociceptive effects (tail-flick and hotp-late tests) of morphine (0.1-1.6 micrograms) with either bupivacaine, 25 micrograms, or lidocaine, 200 micrograms, were significantly greater than the effects of morphine or the local anesthetics when administered alone. When morphine was administered with the local anesthetics, the intensity and the duration of antinociception were greater, although the time courses of the effects resembled that of morphine administered alone. An enhanced effect was also observed when combinations of local anesthetics and low doses of morphine were used that by themselves had no or little effect. The addition of morphine did not affect the motor block produced by the local anesthetics. The results indicate a potentiating effect of local anesthetics on spinal morphine antinociception, a finding that may have important clinical implications.     

Dextromethorphan potentiates morphine antinociception at the spinal level in rats

PURPOSE: Morphine is an effective analgesic, but adverse effects limit its clinical use in higher doses. The non-opioid antitussive, dextromethorphan (DM), can potentiate the analgesic effect of morphine and decrease the dose of morphine in acute postoperative pain, but the underlying mechanism remains unclear. We previously observed that DM increases the serum concentration of morphine in rats. Therefore, we investigated the effects of drugs administered at the spinal level to exclude possible pharmacokinetic interactions. As DM has widespread binding sites in the central nervous system [such as N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, sigma receptors and alpha(3)ss(4) nicotinic receptors], we investigated whether the potentiation of morphine antinociception by DM at the spinal level is related to NMDA receptors. METHODS: We used MK-801 as a tool to block the NMDA channel first, and then studied the interaction between intrathecal (i.t.) morphine and DM. The tail-flick test was used to examine the antinociceptive effects of different combinations of morphine and other drugs in rats. RESULTS: DM (2-20 microg) or MK-801 (5-15 microg) showed no significant antinociceptive effect by themselves. The antinociceptive effect of morphine (0.5 microg, i.t.) was significantly enhanced by DM and reached the maximal potentiation (43.7%-50.4%) at doses of 2 to 10 microg. Pretreatment with MK-801 (5 or 10 microg, i.t.) significantly potentiated morphine antinociception by 49.9% or 38.7%, respectively. When rats were pretreated with MK-801, DM could not further enhance morphine antinociception (45.7% vs 50.5% and 43.3%). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that spinal NMDA receptors play an important role in the effect of DM to potentiate morphine antinociception.     

The antinociceptive effect of the combination of spinal morphine with systemic morphine or buprenorphine.

We sought to analyze the mode of interaction of spinal morphine with systemic morphine or buprenorphine, administered in a wide range of antinociceptive doses. The study was performed on Sprague-Dawley rats by using a plantar stimulation test and isobolographic and fractional analyses of drug interaction. The isobolographic and fractional analyses demonstrated that intrathecal morphine interacted with subcutaneous morphine in a synergistic manner while producing a 50% or 75% antinociceptive effect. The sum of D(75) fractions was more than that for 50% antinociception, suggesting a less dramatic interaction. The combination with a maximal relative dose of systemic morphine (0.66:1) showed a maximal degree of supraadditivity. The interaction between spinal morphine and systemic buprenorphine was similar to that of morphine/morphine, although the supra-additivity was not as pronounced. For the doses that produced a 50% antinociceptive effect, a synergistic interaction was observed only for the combination with a morphine/buprenorphine ratio of 1.33:1. When the relative amount of intrathecal morphine was decreased or increased, the effect became additive. At the doses that produced 75% antinociception, both combinations of morphine and buprenorphine demonstrated supraadditive interaction. Implications: Spinal morphine interacts with systemic morphine or buprenorphine in asupraadditive manner. This mode of interaction most probably results from the simultaneous activation of spinal and supraspinal antinociceptive systems.Supraspinal structures played a more important role in the antinociceptive effect of experimental combinations than structures of the spinal cord.     

The role of spinal opioid receptors in antinociceptive effects produced by intrathecal administration of hydromorphone and buprenorphine in the rat

The intrathecal administration of morphine has been the standard therapy to control long-term intractable pain. Recently, a panel of pain therapy experts suggested that because of the lack of efficacy or because of the side effects produced by morphine in some patients, other drugs, such as hydromorphone and buprenorphine, should be investigated for their analgesic properties. We designed this study to compare the efficacy of intrathecal hydromorphone and buprenorphine to suppress thermal nociception in male Sprague-Dawley rats. An additional objective was to understand whether hydromorphone and buprenorphine bind and act as agonists to mu-, delta-, and kappa-spinal opioid receptors. Intrathecally-administered hydromorphone and buprenorphine produced a dose- and time-dependent increase in the tail-flick response latency in rats. The 50% effective dose value for the antinociceptive effect of buprenorphine and hydromorphone were 4 and 69.5 nmol/L, respectively. Both drugs act as agonists to mu-opioid receptors, as determined by their ability to displace [(3)H]-DAMGO from the spinal opioid receptors and by the ability of an opioid receptor antagonist, naloxone, to reverse their antinociceptive effects. Buprenorphine also has an agonistic effect on the kappa-opioid receptors. For the first time, we report that intrathecal buprenorphine is approximately 17 times more effective than hydromorphone in inhibiting thermal pain, and buprenorphine produces its antinociceptive effect by acting as an agonist at both mu- and kappa-spinal opioid receptors. Naloxone administered intrathecally was effective in preventing the antinociceptive effects of subsequent intrathecal injections of buprenorphine. IMPLICATIONS: Hydromorphone and buprenorphine are two important drugs used for pain relief. We observed that intrathecal buprenorphine is 17 times more potent than hydromorphone to inhibit pain in rats. Both drugs exert their effects through specific spinal opioid receptors.     

The interaction of antinociceptive effects of morphine and GABA receptor agonists within the rat spinal cord.

Previous reports indicate that there may be an interaction between gamma-aminobutyric acid receptors and opioid receptors systems within the spinal cord, the antinociceptive effects of which have not been elucidated. We examined the effects of intrathecally coadministered morphine and muscimol or baclofen on somatic and visceral antinociception in rats. The tail flick (TF) test and colorectal distension (CD) test were used to assess somatic and visceral antinociceptive effects, respectively. Motor function was also assessed. The measurements were performed for 180 min after the intrathecal administration of morphine (0.1-10 micrograms), muscimol (0.2-10 micrograms), baclofen (0.03-1 microgram), combination of morphine and muscimol or baclofen, or saline. Morphine, muscimol, or baclofen increased both TF latency and CD threshold in a dose-dependent fashion. Although morphine 0.1 microgram, muscimol 0.2 microgram, or baclofen 0.03 microgram alone did not significantly increase TF latency and CD threshold, the combination of morphine 0.1 microgram and muscimol 0.2 microgram or baclofen 0.03 microgram significantly increased both TF latency and CD threshold. The coadministration of muscimol or baclofen increased the antinociceptive effects of morphine in intensity and duration. None of the rats showed motor dysfunction after the coadministration of morphine and muscimol 0.2 microgram, although muscimol produced motor paralysis of the lower limbs in a dose-dependent fashion. Those results suggest a clinical relevance of the coadministration of mu-opioids and GABA receptor agonists for pain control. Implications: We examined the antinociceptive interaction between morphine and muscimol or baclofen at the spinal level in rats. Intrathecal muscimol or baclofen potentiated both somatic and visceral antinociceptive effects of morphine.     

Interactions between noradrenergic and cholinergic mechanisms involved in spinal nociceptive processing

Antinociceptive effects have been demonstrated after systemic and spinal administration of the adrenoceptor agonist clonidine and cholinomimetic drugs in animals and human. The present investigation was undertaken in rats to study the possible interactions between spinal noradrenergic and cholinergic mechanisms in modulating the reaction to nociceptive stimuli. Using the tail immersion test, an additive antinociceptive effect was found between intrathecal (IT) clonidine (10 micrograms) and physostigmine (15 micrograms, IT). The effect of clonidine was attenuated by atropine (15 micrograms, IT). Physostigmine (15 micrograms, IT) antinociception, which was of short duration was abolished by atropine (15 micrograms, IT) and attenuated by phentolamine (20 micrograms, IT). Neostigmine (5 micrograms, IT) produced a prolonged antinociceptive response. In animals pretreated with 6-hydroxydopamine IT, leading to a selective depletion of spinal cord noradrenaline, physostigmine (15 micrograms, IT) was ineffective in altering the nociceptive test response. Neither clonidine, nor physostigmine produced changes in latency times in the hot plate test (58 degrees C) in the doses employed. In conclusion, a clear-cut interaction exists between spinal noradrenergic and cholinergic systems for antinociception. To explain the interactions, several possible mechanisms may be considered, including cholinomimetic effects produced by clonidine, and the presence of muscarinic receptors in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord.     

Experimental arthritis in the rat does not alter the analgesic potency of intrathecal or intraarticular morphine.

To explore further the role of inflammatory processing on peripheral opioid pharmacology, we examined whether the potency of intraarticular (i.a.) or intrathecal (i.t) morphine in tests of thermal and mechanical nociception changed during the induction of experimental arthritis in the rat. Thermal nociception by i.t. morphine (3, 10, and 50 micrograms) or i.a. morphine (100, 1000, and 3000 micrograms) was assessed by means of a modified Hargreaves box ever) 28 h. Mechanical antinociception was determined for the largest applied doses of morphine using von Frey hairs. Morphine produced dose-dependent thermal antinociception after i.t. or i.a. administration: a 50% increase in maximum antinociceptive thermal response (50% effective dose) was produced by i.t. doses of 9.7 micrograms at the start and 9.1 micrograms at the end of this 28-h observational interval, whereas after i.a. administration, 50% effective dose values were 553 micrograms at the start and 660 micrograms at the end. The largest applied dose of either i.t. or i.a. morphine produced mechanical antinociception. On Day 1, the antinociceptive effect for mechanical nociception (expressed as the area under the curve of the percentage of maximal possible effect values at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 h) was 68% for i.t. morphine 50 micrograms and 53% for i.a. morphine 3000 micrograms. Neither result differed from the corresponding area under the curve values on Day 2. Naloxone administered either i.t. or i.a. abolished the antinociceptive action of morphine given at the same site. We conclude that, although morphine has a peripheral analgesic site of action in a rat arthritis model, its potency for both i.a. and i.t. routes of administration does not change during the onset of arthritis. Implications: In this animal study, we showed that the administration of morphine modulates thermal and mechanical antinociception at central and peripheral sites in inflammatory pain.     

The antinociceptive effects of fentanyl, midazolam and clonidine and their interactions in the spinal dorsal horn]

Lamina V-type neurons on the spinal dorsal horn which responded to the bradykinin injection into the femoral artery were studied neurophysiologically in the spinal transected cats by the tungsten microelectrode method. It has been demonstrated that the separate and combined antinociceptive effects of fentanyl, clonidine and midazolam administered intrathecally can produce reduction in response to noxious stimuli. Fentanyl (25 micrograms), clonidine (30 micrograms) and midazolam (1.0 mg) separately suppressed noxious evoked activity at the spinal level. On the other hand, fentanyl (5 micrograms), clonidine (5 micrograms) and midazolam (0.5 mg) each produced no significant suppression of the evoked activity. However, the combinations of drugs at lower doses produced supra-additive suppressive effect. These suppressive effects were reversed by each antagonist (naloxone, yohimbine and flumazenil). These findings suggest that when two of these drugs are combined at subanalgesic doses, a significant synergistic interaction is exerted. Therefore, the use of these drugs in combination can reduce the total amount of any one drug required for analgesia in the spinal cord and also reduce the side effects of these agents.     

Antinociception by spinal and systemic oxycodone: why does the route make a difference? In vitro and in vivo studies in rats

BACKGROUND: The pharmacology of oxycodone is poorly understood despite its growing clinical use. The discrepancy between its good clinical effectiveness after systemic administration and the loss of potency after spinal administration led the authors to study the pharmacodynamic effects of oxycodone and its metabolites using in vivo and in vitro models in rats. METHODS: Male Sprague-Dawley rats were used in hot-plate, tail-flick, and paw-pressure tests to study the antinociceptive properties of morphine, oxycodone, and its metabolites oxymorphone and noroxycodone. Mu-opioid receptor agonist-stimulated GTPgamma[S] autoradiography was used to study G-protein activation induced by morphine, oxycodone, and oxymorphone in the rat brain and spinal cord. Spontaneous locomotor activity was measured to assess possible sedation or motor dysfunction. Naloxone and the selective kappa-opioid receptor antagonist nor-binaltorphimine were used to study the opioid receptor selectivity of the drugs. RESULTS: Oxycodone showed lower efficacy and potency to stimulate GTPgamma[S] binding in the spinal cord and periaqueductal gray compared with morphine and oxymorphone. This could relate to the fact that oxycodone produced only weak naloxone-reversible antinociception after intrathecal administration. It also suggests that the metabolites may have a role in oxycodone-induced analgesia in rats. Intrathecal oxymorphone produced strong long-lasting antinociception, whereas noroxycodone produced antinociception with very high doses only. Subcutaneous administration of oxycodone and oxymorphone produced thermal and mechanical antinociception that was reversed by naloxone but not by nor-binaltorphimine. Oxymorphone was more potent than oxycodone, particularly in the hot-plate and paw-pressure tests. CONCLUSIONS: The low intrathecal potency of oxycodone in rats seems be related to its low efficacy and potency to stimulate mu-opioid receptor activation in the spinal cord.     

Intracerebroventricular morphine produces antinociception by evoking gamma-aminobutyric acid release through activation of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptors in the spinal cord

BACKGROUND: It has been generally considered that supraspinal morphine activates the serotonergic descending inhibitory system and releases serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine [5-HT]) in the spinal cord, producing antinociception through activation of 5-HT receptors. The involvement of a spinal gamma-aminobutyric acid-mediated (GABAergic) system is also suggested in supraspinal morphine antinociception. It has been reported that spinal GABAergic system contributes to 5-HT3 receptor-mediated antinociception. In this study, the authors investigated the contribution of spinal 5-HT3 receptor and the GABAergic system in the intracerebroventricular morphine-induced antinociception. METHODS: Male Sprague-Dawley rats were used. Using the spinal microdialysis method, concentrations of 5-HT and GABA were measured after intracerebroventricular morphine administration. The effect of intracerebroventricular naloxone or spinal perfusion of a selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist 3-tropanyl-indole-3-carboxylate methiodide on the spinal release of GABA after intracerebroventricular morphine administration was also examined. In the behavioral study, involvement of 5-HT3 receptors or GABAA receptors in the intracerebroventricular morphine-induced antinociceptive effect was investigated using the tail-flick test. RESULTS: Intracerebroventricular morphine (40 nmol) significantly increased spinal GABA and 5-HT release. Evoked spinal GABA release was reversed by intracerebroventricular naloxone (40 nmol) or spinal perfusion of 3-tropanyl-indole-3-carboxylate methiodide (1 mm). In the behavioral study, intracerebroventricular morphine produced significant antinociception. Intrathecal administration of either GABAA receptor antagonist bicuculine or 3-tropanyl-indole-3-carboxylate methiodide but not vehicle reversed the morphine-induced antinociceptive effect. CONCLUSION: Intracerebroventricular morphine evokes spinal GABA release via the activation of 5-HT3 receptors in the spinal cord, resulting in antinociceptive effect.     

Systemic physostigmine shows antiallodynic effects in neuropathic rats.

The aim of this study was to examine the antiallodynic and antinociceptive effects of subcutaneously administered physostigmine (50, 100, 200 micrograms/kg), compared with morphine (2.5, 5, 10 mg/kg) and NaCl after spinal nerve ligation in rats. The following stimuli were used: acetone (cold allodynia), von Frey hairs (mechanical allodynia), and paw flick test (thermal nociception). Motility boxes were used to investigate the effects of the drugs on motor performance. Physostigmine attenuated both mechanical and cold allodynia dose-dependently but had no effect on the paw flick test. The effect was antagonized by atropine (muscarinic receptor antagonist) but not by mecamylamine (nicotinic receptor antagonist) or naloxone (opioid receptor antagonist). Morphine produced dose-dependent antiallodynic and antinociceptive effects. In the antiallodynic doses, morphine caused severe rigidity. Physostigmine 200 micrograms/kg impaired locomotor activity, but no rigidity was observed. Implications: Physostigmine has different effects on allodynia and nociception, which suggests that different cholinergic (muscarinic) mechanisms may be involved in neuropathic and nociceptive pain.     

Antinociception by Spinal and Systemic Oxycodone: Why Does the Route Make a Difference?: In Vitro and In Vivo Studies in Rats

Background: The pharmacology of oxycodone is poorly understood despite its growing clinical use. The discrepancy between its good clinical effectiveness after systemic administration and the loss of potency after spinal administration led the authors to study the pharmacodynamic effects of oxycodone and its metabolites using in vivo and in vitro models in rats.

Methods: Male Sprague-Dawley rats were used in hot-plate, tail-flick, and paw-pressure tests to study the antinociceptive properties of morphine, oxycodone, and its metabolites oxymorphone and noroxycodone. [mu]-Opioid receptor agonist-stimulated GTP[gamma][35S] autoradiography was used to study G-protein activation induced by morphine, oxycodone, and oxymorphone in the rat brain and spinal cord. Spontaneous locomotor activity was measured to assess possible sedation or motor dysfunction. Naloxone and the selective [kappa]-opioid receptor antagonist nor-binaltorphimine were used to study the opioid receptor selectivity of the drugs.

Results: Oxycodone showed lower efficacy and potency to stimulate GTP[gamma][35S] binding in the spinal cord and periaqueductal gray compared with morphine and oxymorphone. This could relate to the fact that oxycodone produced only weak naloxone-reversible antinociception after intrathecal administration. It also suggests that the metabolites may have a role in oxycodone-induced analgesia in rats. Intrathecal oxymorphone produced strong long-lasting antinociception, whereas noroxycodone produced antinociception with very high doses only. Subcutaneous administration of oxycodone and oxymorphone produced thermal and mechanical antinociception that was reversed by naloxone but not by nor-binaltorphimine. Oxymorphone was more potent than oxycodone, particularly in the hot-plate and paw-pressure tests.     

The effects of intrathecal morphine encapsulated in L- and D-dipalmitoylphosphatidyl choline liposomes on acute nociception in rats

Liposomes can serve as a sustained-release carrier system, permitting the spinal delivery of large opioid doses restricting the dose for acute systemic uptake. We evaluated the antinociceptive effects of morphine encapsulated in liposomes of two isomeric phospholipids, L-dipalmitoylphosphatidyl choline (L-DPPC) and D-dipalmitoylphosphatidyl choline (D-DPPC), in comparison with morphine in saline. Sprague-Dawley rats with chronic lumbar intrathecal catheters were tested for their acute nociceptive response using a hindpaw thermal escape test. Their general behavior, motor function, pinna reflex, and corneal reflex were also examined. The duration of antinociception was longer in both liposomal morphine groups than in the free morphine group. The peak antinociceptive effects were observed within 30 min after intrathecal morphine, L-DPPC or D-DPPC morphine injection. The rank order of the area under the effect-time curve for antinociception was L-DPPC morphine > D-DPPC morphine > morphine. The 50% effective dose was: 2.7 microg (morphine), 4.6 microg (L-DPPC morphine), and 6.4 microg (D-DPPC morphine). D-DPPC morphine had less side effects for a given antinociceptive AUC than morphine. In conclusion, L-DPPC and D-DPPC liposome encapsulation of morphine prolonged the antinociceptive effect on acute thermal stimulation and could decrease side effects, compared with morphine alone. Implications: Two isomers of liposome (L-dipalmitoylphosphatidyl choline and D-dipalmitoylphosphatidyl choline) encapsulation of morphine prolonged the analgesic effect on acute thermal-induced pain when administered intrathecally and could decrease side effects, compared with morphine alone.     

Antagonism of antinociception produced by intrathecal clonidine by ketorolac in the rat: the role of the opioid system

The management of severe pain may require "balanced analgesia," involving the use of analgesics with different modes of action. Clonidine, an alpha(2)-adrenoreceptor agonist produces analgesia by itself as well as when given with morphine and local anesthetics. Ketorolac is indicated for the management of moderately severe acute pain and causes analgesia equivalent to morphine. This study was designed to investigate whether the addition of ketorolac promotes antinociception produced by intrathecal administration of clonidine in male Sprague-Dawley rats. Intrathecal injection of clonidine (1-30 microg) induced a dose-dependent increase in antinociception as measured by the tail flick (TF) and hot plate tests. Ketorolac alone (150-600 microg) increased the antinociception by 50%-60% only in the TF test. Ketorolac (10 microg) decreased clonidine (10 microg)-induced antinociception from 69.1% +/- 7.8% to 23.5% +/- 1. 6% (P < 0.05) in the TF test and 35.7% +/- 4.7% to 4.5% +/- 0.1% (P < 0.05) maximum possible effect in the hot plate test. Ketorolac also antagonized the effect of 30 microg of clonidine. The opioid receptor antagonist naloxone antagonized the antinociceptive effect of clonidine and ketorolac, indicating the involvement of the opioid system in the antinociception produced by clonidine or ketorolac. However, neither clonidine nor ketorolac (10(-8) to 10(-3) M) inhibited the binding of specific ligands to mu-, delta-, and kappa-opioid receptors, indicating a lack of direct interaction of clonidine and ketorolac with opioid receptors. These results suggest that intrathecal injection of ketorolac antagonizes the antinociception produced by clonidine.     

An experimental itch model in monkeys: characterization of intrathecal morphine-induced scratching and antinociception

BACKGROUND: The most common side effect of spinal opioid administration is pruritus, which has been treated with a variety of agents with variable success. Currently, there are few animal models developed to study this side effect. The aim of this study was to establish a nonhuman primate model to pharmacologically characterize the effects of intrathecal administration of morphine. METHODS: Eight adult rhesus monkeys were used. Scratching responses were videotaped and counted by observers who were blinded to experimental conditions. Antinociception was measured by a warm-water (50 degrees C) tail-withdrawal assay. The dose-response of intrathecal morphine (1-320 microg) for both scratching and antinociception in all subjects was established. An opioid antagonist, nalmefene, was administered either intravenously or subcutaneously to assess its efficacy against intrathecal morphine. RESULTS: Intrathecal morphine (1-32 microg) increased scratching in a dose-dependent manner. Higher doses of intrathecal morphine (10-100 microg) produced thermal antinociception in a dose-dependent manner. On the other hand, nalmefene (10-32 microg/kg intravenously) attenuated maximum scratching responses among subjects. Pretreatment with nalmefene (32 microg/kg subcutaneously) produced approximately 10-fold rightward shifts of intrathecal morphine dose-response curves for both behavioral effects. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that intrathecal morphine-induced scratching and antinociception are mediated by opioid receptors. The magnitude of nalmefene antagonism of intrathecal morphine is consistent with microL opioid receptor mediation. This experimental itch model is useful for evaluating different agents that may suppress scratching without interfering with antinociception. It may also facilitate the clarification of mechanisms underlying these phenomena.     

Intracerebroventricular Morphine Produces Antinociception by Evoking γ-Aminobutyric Acid Release through Activation of 5-Hydroxytryptamine 3 Receptors in the Spinal Cord

Background: It has been generally considered that supraspinal morphine activates the serotonergic descending inhibitory system and releases serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine [5-HT]) in the spinal cord, producing antinociception through activation of 5-HT receptors. The involvement of a spinal [gamma]-aminobutyric acid-mediated (GABAergic) system is also suggested in supraspinal morphine antinociception. It has been reported that spinal GABAergic system contributes to 5-HT3 receptor-mediated antinociception. In this study, the authors investigated the contribution of spinal 5-HT3 receptor and the GABAergic system in the intracerebroventricular morphine-induced antinociception.

Methods: Male Sprague-Dawley rats were used. Using the spinal microdialysis method, concentrations of 5-HT and GABA were measured after intracerebroventricular morphine administration. The effect of intracerebroventricular naloxone or spinal perfusion of a selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist 3-tropanyl-indole-3-carboxylate methiodide on the spinal release of GABA after intracerebroventricular morphine administration was also examined. In the behavioral study, involvement of 5-HT3 receptors or GABAA receptors in the intracerebroventricular morphine-induced antinociceptive effect was investigated using the tail-flick test.

Results: Intracerebroventricular morphine (40 nmol) significantly increased spinal GABA and 5-HT release. Evoked spinal GABA release was reversed by intracerebroventricular naloxone (40 nmol) or spinal perfusion of 3-tropanyl-indole-3-carboxylate methiodide (1 mm). In the behavioral study, intracerebroventricular morphine produced significant antinociception. Intrathecal administration of either GABAA receptor antagonist bicuculine or 3-tropanyl-indole-3-carboxylate methiodide but not vehicle reversed the morphine-induced antinociceptive effect.