α2-Adrenoceptors are widely distributed throughout the central nervous system (CNS) and the systemic administration of α2-agonists such as dexmedetomidine produces clinically useful, centrally mediated sedation and analgesia; however, these same actions also limit the utility of these agents (ie, unwanted sedative actions). Despite a wealth of data on cellular and synaptic actions of α2-agonists in vitro, it is not known which neuronal circuits are modulated in vivo to produce the analgesic effect. To address this issue, we made in vivo recordings of membrane currents and synaptic activities in superficial spinal dorsal horn neurons and examined their responses to systemic dexmedetomidine. We found that dexmedetomidine at doses that produce analgesia (<10 μg/kg) enhanced inhibitory postsynaptic transmission within the superficial dorsal horn without altering excitatory synaptic transmission or evoking direct postsynaptic membrane currents. In contrast, higher doses of dexmedetomidine (>10 μg/kg) induced outward currents by a direct postsynaptic action. The dexmedetomidine-mediated inhibitory postsynaptic current facilitation was not mimicked by spinal application of dexmedetomidine and was absent in spinalized rats, suggesting that it acts at a supraspinal site. Furthermore, it was inhibited by spinal application of the α1-antagonist prazosin. In the brainstem, low doses of systemic dexmedetomidine produced an excitation of locus coeruleus neurons. These results suggest that systemic α2-adrenoceptor stimulation may facilitate inhibitory synaptic responses in the superficial dorsal horn to produce analgesia mediated by activation of the pontospinal noradrenergic inhibitory system. This novel mechanism may provide new targets for intervention, perhaps allowing analgesic actions to be dissociated from excessive sedation.
Tramadol is thought to modulate synaptic transmissions in the spinal dorsal horn mainly by activating µ-opioid receptors and by inhibiting the reuptake of monoamines in the CNS. However, the precise mode of modulation remains unclear. We used an in vivo patch clamp technique in urethane-anesthetized rats to determine the antinociceptive mechanism of tramadol. In vivo whole-cell recordings of spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic currents (sIPSCs) and spontaneous excitatory postsynaptic currents (sEPSCs) were made from substantia gelatinosa (SG) neurons (lamina II) at holding potentials of 0 mV and -70 mV, respectively. The effects of intravenous administration (0.5, 5, 15 mg/kg) of tramadol were evaluated. The effects of superfusion of tramadol on the surface of the spinal cord and of a tramadol metabolite (M1) were further analyzed. Intravenous administration of tramadol at doses >5 mg/kg decreased the sEPSCs and increased the sIPSCs in SG neurons. These effects were not observed following naloxone pretreatment. Tramadol superfusion at a clinically relevant concentration (10 µM) had no effect, but when administered at a very high concentration (100 µM), tramadol decreased sEPSCs, produced outward currents, and enhanced sIPSCs. The effects of M1 (1, 5 mg/kg intravenously) on sEPSCs and sIPSCs were similar to those of tramadol at a corresponding dose (5, 15 mg/kg). The present study demonstrated that systemically administered tramadol indirectly inhibited glutamatergic transmission, and enhanced GABAergic and glycinergic transmissions in SG neurons. These effects were mediated primarily by the activation of μ-opioid receptors. M1 may play a key role in the antinociceptive mechanisms of tramadol.
Background: Volatile anesthetics suppress noxiously evoked activity in the spinal dorsal horn, which could contribute in part to analgesia, immobility. Modulation of excitatory and inhibitory synaptic transmission in substantia gelatinosa neurons could lead to the suppression of dorsal horn activity; however, this phenomenon has not yet been investigated fully. Methods: In urethane-anesthetized rats, extracellular activity of dorsal horn neurons (action potentials) and excitatory/ inhibitory postsynaptic currents in substantia gelatinosa neurons were recorded using extracellular and in vivo patch-clamp techniques, respectively, to assess the spontaneous and the noxious-evoked activity. Sevoflurane or desflurane at concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 2 minimum alveolar concentration was administered by inhalation. Hot-and cold-plate tests were performed to assess nociceptive responses during the inhalation of volatile anesthetics at lower anesthetic doses (0.1-0.5 minimum alveolar concentration). Results: At anesthetic doses (1 and 2 minimum alveolar concentration), both sevoflurane and desflurane decreased the frequency of action potentials in the dorsal horn and the activities of excitatory postsynaptic currents in substantia gelatinosa neurons during pinch stimulation and decreased the activities of spontaneous and miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents. Inhibition of the frequencies was more prominent than that of amplitudes in spontaneous and miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents at these anesthetic doses. However, at subanesthetic doses (0.1 and 0.2 minimum alveolar concentration), desflurane facilitated action potentials and excitatory postsynaptic currents. Inhibitory postsynaptic currents were inhibited by both anesthetics at anesthetic doses (1 and 2 minimum alveolar concentration). Hot-or cold-plate tests showed hyperalgesic effects of desflurane at subanesthetic doses (0.1 and 0.2 minimum alveolar concentration) and a dose-dependent analgesic effect of sevoflurane. Conclusions: Sevoflurane and desflurane at anesthetic doses suppressed dorsal horn activity mainly via inhibition of excitatory postsynaptic currents in substantia gelatinosa neurons, which would contribute to their analgesic properties. Presynaptic mechanisms were likely in excitatory postsynaptic currents inhibition. Desflurane but not sevoflurane may have a hyperalgesic effect at subanesthetic doses.
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.