The authors challenge the general view that the analgesic effect of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can be universally attributed to their inhibitory effects on the synthesis of peripherally formed prostaglandins. Analgesic activity by some of these compounds in the reduction of physiological pain elicited by a single noxious stimulus, or the treatment of acute pain which results from sudden trauma to otherwise healthy tissue, is better described as an antinociceptive effect. Single-dose studies in the dental pain model that have been conducted in double-blind conditions and included a placebo control group have been reviewed; those NSAIDs which are significantly superior to the reference compound aspirin 650mg and those which could represent real alternatives to the use of narcotics in certain situations for the management of acute pain have been identified. Azapropazone, diflunisal, naproxen, oxaprozin and tolmetin are all weak inhibitors of prostaglandin synthesis, yet they have been shown to be more effective than aspirin. In a model of joint pain, azapropazone 600mg has been shown to be as effective as pethidine (meperidine) 100mg despite being the weakest inhibitor of prostaglandin synthesis. Whether the antinociceptive effect of azapropazone acts at a peripheral or a central level, or both, is not clear; evidence for the effects of NSAIDs on the central nervous system (CNS) is discussed. Historically, the antinociceptive character of some NSAIDs is apparent in several studies in both animals and humans. More recently, experimental algesimetry models designed to distinguish the antinociceptive effects of NSAIDs include the use in humans of photoplethysmography and computer-supported infrared thermographic imaging.
Evidence has accumulated during the last decade to support the view that the pharmacokinetic behaviour of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) contributes not only decisively to their therapeutic effects but also to the type and incidence of their side effects. It has been shown that NSAIDs reach particularly high concentrations in those compartments in which they cause effects and side effects. Specifically, the data reviewed herein indicate that the accumulation of NSAID within gastric mucosal cells a priori is a principal factor associated with the intervention of intracellular biochemical events and resultant gastric mucosal damage. To a large extent this behaviour is according to the precepts of classical absorption theory; in this respect the limitations of such theory are examined. Our survey further indicates that the failure of certain NSAIDs to significantly reduce gastric mucosal levels of prostaglandins (PG) in vivo may reflect pharmacokinetic differences between NSAIDs rather than tissue-specific differences in their potency as inhibitors of cyclo-oxygenase.
In this review we critically appraise the value of some phasic and tonic nociceptive tests as models for differentiating the antinociceptive effects of opioid agonists. Using heat-evoked withdrawal of the hind paw or tail of a rodent, several early studies have assessed the effects of stimulus intensity upon antinociceptive potency of opioid agonists. After intrathecal (i.t.) administration of either morphine or sufentanil, for example, for any incremental change in stimulus intensity, the degree of right shift in the dose-response relationship was greater for morphine than for sufentanil. At first glance, such data appear to provide robust support for the pharmacological model of fractional receptor occupancy (FRO), which, according to the historical tenets of classical receptor theory, describes the relationship between intrinsic efficacy and the total receptor concentration. However, new data which elegantly characterize the relative contribution of small calibre unmyelinated and myelinated nociceptive afferents in mediating thermal-evoked responses challenge the exclusivity of such explanations with origins in classical theory. Within our review we report the results of experiments which provide direct electrophysiological evidence that noxious skin heating at a low rate activates C-polymodal nociceptors, but does not effectively activate A-delta mechanothermal nociceptors. In contrast, a high rate of skin heating activates both nociceptor classes, but produces a more intense activation of A-delta nociceptors that occurs after a shorter onset latency compared with the activation of C-fibre nociceptors. Thus, in direct challenge to the traditional model of FRO, a shift in the dose-response relationship of morphine to the right with a reduction in efficacy, may reflect the limited effectiveness of morphine to attenuate the A-delta-mediated component which assumes increasing dominance at high intensity heating. In our appraisal of other nociceptive models we provide an in-depth characterization of afferent processing in the early neonate rat, in which opioids have been tested in both phasic (tail flick and hot-plate) and tonic (formalin) tests. Afferent processing in this model is typified by several behavioural, anatomical and functional features which, although not pathological, are characteristic of those observed in models of nerve injury using the adult rat. Notably, these features include a lack of segmental inhibition ('disinhibition') and afferent input in large diameter myelinated fibres which make synaptic contacts within superficial laminae of the dorsal horn that in the adult are predominantly nociceptive. Paradoxically, because this paradigm demonstrates increased sensitivity to the antinociceptive effects of opioids it may have special merit as a model of tonic pain. It was recently announced that the i.t. administration of pertussis toxin (PTX) caused hyperalgesia and allodynia that appears similar to the symptoms reported by patients suffering from neuropathic pain. Unlike the effects of other op...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.