ArticleVeterinary medicine and science2025
Comparison of the Inhibitory Effects of Flunixin Meglumine and Meloxicam on the Smooth Muscles Motility of the Gastrointestinal Tract of Cattle.
Article in Veterinary medicine and science, 2025. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the inhibitory effect of flunixin meglumine and meloxicam on the smooth muscles of the gastrointestinal tract in male cattle. Tissue samples, including the abomasum, ileum, proximal loop and centripetal gyri of the ascending colon, were collected from routinely slaughtered male cattle. These samples were sectioned into strips and mounted in an isolated tissue bath system. Smooth muscle contractions were evoked using carbachol, and cumulative doses of atropine, flunixin meglumine and meloxicam were administered to assess smooth muscle activity. Atropine, used as a positive control, did not abolish contractions in the abomasum and centripetal gyri tissues, even at a high concentration of 10 µM. Based on area-under-curve values, flunixin meglumine demonstrated a greater inhibitory effect than meloxicam by factors of 8.57, 4.28, 12.44 and 3.93 in the abomasum, ileum, proximal loop and centripetal gyri tissues, respectively. For beats-per-minute values, flunixin meglumine exhibited a stronger inhibitory effect than meloxicam by factors of 7.22, 3.88, 7.03 and 3.35 in the abomasum, ileum, proximal loop and centripetal gyri tissues, respectively. Finally, based on peak maximum values, flunixin meglumine's inhibitory effect was 6.13, 4.43, 7.07 and 7.02 times greater than that of meloxicam in the abomasum, ileum, proximal loop and centripetal gyri tissues, respectively. In conclusion, flunixin meglumine was more potent than meloxicam in inhibiting smooth muscle activity. Conversely, meloxicam is associated with fewer adverse effects due to its selective action on the cyclooxygenase-2 enzyme. However, flunixin meglumine may be more advantageous than meloxicam for applications in beef and milk production due to its shorter residue elimination time.
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.