ArticleJournal of anesthesia2014
Potentiation of [Met5]enkephalin-induced antinociception by mixture of three peptidase inhibitors in rat.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePrevious in vitro studies have shown that degradation of opioid peptides during incubation with cerebral membrane preparations is almost completely prevented by a mixture of three peptidase inhibitors (PIs), namely, amastatin, captopril, and phosphoramidon. In the present in vivo study, we evaluate the effects of intrathecal administration of these PIs on antinociception by [Met(5)]enkephalin (ME) or PIs themselves.
methodsDrugs were administered into the thoracolumbar level of the spinal cord in the intrathecal space in rat. Induction of antinociception was measured by the tail immersion assay, with 55 °C as the nociceptive stimulus. Effects of PIs on antinociception were evaluated by dose-response study (ME, 1-20 nmol; PIs, 1-20 nmol each), by comparison of differences among two combinations of PIs (amastatin and captopril; captopril and phosphoramidon; amastatin and phosphoramidon) and three PIs (amastatin, captopril, and phosphoramidon), and by using opioid receptor selective antagonists.
resultsIntrathecal administration of ME with these three PIs or PIs alone significantly and dose dependently increased antinociception in a μ- and δ-opioid receptor antagonist-reversible manner; moreover, the degree of antinociception with a combination of any two of these was less than that with all three, indicating that any residual single peptidase could inactivate significant amounts of ME.
conclusionThe present data, together with those of earlier studies, clearly demonstrate that amastatin-, captopril-, and phosphoramidon-sensitive enzymes play an important role in inactivation of opioid peptides at the spinal level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.