Metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 (mGlu5) has been demonstrated to play a role in the modulation of numerous nociceptive modalities. When administered via peripheral, intrathecal, or systemic routes, mGlu5 antagonists have analgesic properties in a variety of preclinical pain models. Despite a wealth of data supporting the use of mGlu5 antagonists to treat pain, studies have been limited to preclinical animal models due to a lack of mGlu5 antagonists that are approved for use in humans. It has been demonstrated previously that fenobam [N-(3-chlorophenyl)-NЈ-(4,5-dihydro-1-methyl-4-oxo-1H-imidazole-2-yl)urea], an anxiolytic shown to be safe and effective in human trials, is a selective and potent noncompetitive antagonist of mGlu5 (J Pharmacol Exp Ther 315:711-721, 2005). Here, we report a series of studies aimed at testing whether fenobam, similar to the prototypical mGlu5 antagonist 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)-pyridine (MPEP), has analgesic properties in mice. We show that fenobam reduces formalininduced pain behaviors and relieves established inflammationinduced thermal hypersensitivity in mice. Similar results were seen with MPEP. Administration of fenobam resulted in an increase in locomotor activity in the open-field task but did not impair performance on the accelerating Rotarod. Analysis of brain and plasma fenobam levels indicated that fenobam is rapidly concentrated in brain after intraperitoneal administration in mice but is essentially cleared from circulation within 1 h after injection. Fenobam had no analgesic effect in mGlu5 knockout mice, whereas the prototypical antagonist MPEP retained significant analgesic efficacy in mGlu5 knockouts. These results demonstrate that fenobam is analgesic in mice and has an improved in vivo selectivity for mGlu5 over MPEP.
Respiratory complications after tracheal extubation are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, suggesting that process improvements in this clinical area are needed. The decreased rate of respiratory adverse events occurring during tracheal intubation since the implementation of guidelines for difficult airway management supports the value of education and guidelines in advancing clinical practice. Accurate use of terms in defining concepts and describing distinct clinical conditions is paramount to facilitating understanding and fostering education in the treatment of tracheal extubation-related complications. As an example, understanding the distinction between extubation failure and weaning failure allows one to appreciate the need for pre-extubation tests that focus on assessing airway patency in addition to evaluating the ability to breathe spontaneously. Tracheal reintubation after planned extubation is a relatively rare event in the postoperative period of elective surgeries, with reported rates of reintubation in the operating room and postanesthesia care unit between 0.1% and 0.45%, but is a fairly common event in critically ill patients (0.4%-25%). Conditions such as obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, major head/neck and upper airway surgery, and obstetric and cervical spine procedures carry significantly increased risks of extubation failure and are frequently associated with difficult airway management. Extubation failure follows loss of upper airway patency. Edema, soft tissue collapse, and laryngospasm are among the most frequent mechanisms of upper airway obstruction. Planning for tracheal extubation is a critical component of a successful airway management strategy, particularly when dealing with situations at increased risk for extubation failure and in patients with difficult airways. Adequate planning requires identification of patients who have or may develop a difficult airway, recognition of situations at increased risk of postextubation airway compromise, and understanding the causes and underlying mechanisms of extubation failure. An effective strategy to minimize postextubation airway complications should include preemptive optimization of patients' conditions, careful timing of extubation, the presence of experienced personnel trained in advanced airway management, and the availability of the necessary equipment and appropriate postextubation monitoring.
IntroductionHeat/capsaicin skin sensitization is a well-characterized human experimental model to induce hyperalgesia and allodynia. Using this model, gabapentin, among other drugs, was shown to significantly reduce cutaneous hyperalgesia compared to placebo. Since the larger thermal probes used in the original studies to produce heat sensitization are now commercially unavailable, we decided to assess whether previous findings could be replicated with a currently available smaller probe (heated area 9 cm2 versus 12.5–15.7 cm2).Study design and methodsAfter Institutional Review Board approval, 15 adult healthy volunteers participated in two study sessions, scheduled 1 week apart (Part A). In both sessions, subjects were exposed to the heat/capsaicin cutaneous sensitization model. Areas of hypersensitivity to brush stroke and von Frey (VF) filament stimulation were measured at baseline and after rekindling of skin sensitization. Another group of 15 volunteers was exposed to an identical schedule and set of sensitization procedures, but, in each session, received either gabapentin or placebo (Part B).ResultsUnlike previous reports, a similar reduction of areas of hyperalgesia was observed in all groups/sessions. Fading of areas of hyperalgesia over time was observed in Part A. In Part B, there was no difference in area reduction after gabapentin compared to placebo.ConclusionWhen using smaller thermal probes than originally proposed, modifications of other parameters of sensitization and/or rekindling process may be needed to allow the heat/capsaicin sensitization protocol to be used as initially intended. Standardization and validation of experimental pain models is critical to the advancement of translational pain research.
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.