Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19095870›Full record

ArticleAnesthesia and analgesia2009

The effect of intravenous lidocaine on brain activation during non-noxious and acute noxious stimulation of the forepaw: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study in the rat.

Zhongchi Luo, Mei Yu, S David Smith, Mary Kritzer, Congwu Du, Yu Ma, Nora D Volkow, Peter S Glass, Helene Benveniste

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anesthesia and analgesia, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. CNS animal fMRI in pain and analgesia.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2011
    Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Zhongchi LuoDepartments of Biomedical Engineering, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York, USA.
Mei Yu
S David Smith
Mary Kritzer
Congwu Du
Yu Ma
Nora D Volkow
Peter S Glass
Helene Benveniste
Brookhaven National Laboratory · USNational Institutes of Health · USStony Brook University · US

Funding

Neurobiology of Substance Abuse and AddictionZIAAA000550 · NIAAA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM · PI VOLKOW, NORA D. · 2009 to 2025
$115.1M
Neurobiology of Substance Abuse & Addiction - Preclinical StudiesZIAAA000551 · NIAAA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM · PI VOLKOW, NORA D. · 2009 to 2013
$8.2M
Neurobiology of Substance Abuse & Addiction - Preclinical StudiesZ01AA000551 · NIAAA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM · PI VOLKOW, NORA D. · 2004 to 2008
$743k
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 AA000551
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLidocaine can alleviate acute as well as chronic neuropathic pain at very low plasma concentrations in humans and laboratory animals. The mechanism(s) underlying lidocaine's analgesic effect when administered systemically is poorly understood but clearly not related to interruption of peripheral nerve conduction. Other targets for lidocaine's analgesic action(s) have been suggested, including sodium channels and other receptor sites in the central rather than peripheral nervous system. To our knowledge, the effect of lidocaine on the brain's functional response to pain has never been investigated. Here, we therefore characterized the effect of systemic lidocaine on the brain's response to innocuous and acute noxious stimulation in the rat using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

methodsAlpha-chloralose anesthetized rats underwent fMRI to quantify brain activation patterns in response to innocuous and noxious forepaw stimulation before and after IV administration of lidocaine.

resultsInnocuous forepaw stimulation elicited brain activation only in the contralateral primary somatosensory (S1) cortex. Acute noxious forepaw stimulation induced activation in additional brain areas associated with pain perception, including the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2), thalamus, insula and limbic regions. Lidocaine administered at IV doses of either 1 mg/kg, 4 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg did not abolish or diminish brain activation in response to innocuous or noxious stimulation. In fact, IV doses of 4 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg lidocaine enhanced S1 and S2 responses to acute nociceptive stimulation, increasing the activated cortical volume by 50%-60%.

conclusionThe analgesic action of systemic lidocaine in acute pain is not reflected in a straightforward interruption of pain-induced fMRI brain activation as has been observed with opioids. The enhancement of cortical fMRI responses to acute pain by lidocaine observed here has also been reported for cocaine. We recently showed that both lidocaine and cocaine increased intracellular calcium concentrations in cortex, suggesting that this pharmacological effect could account for the enhanced sensitivity to somatosensory stimulation. As our model only measured physiological acute pain, it will be important to also test the response of these same pathways to lidocaine in a model of neuropathic pain to further investigate lidocaine's analgesic mechanism of action.

Indexed as

Brain MappingMagnetic Resonance ImagingAnesthetics, LocalAnimalsBrainDisease Models, AnimalElectric StimulationFemaleForelimbImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedInfusions, IntravenousLidocaineLimbic SystemPainRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyAnesthetics, LocalLidocaine

Identifiers

PMID19095870
PMCPMC2681082
OpenAlexW2028472776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.