Both the discovery of the endocannabinoid system (ECS) and its role in the control of pain and habituation to stress, as well as the significant analgesic and antihyperalgesic effects in animal studies, suggest the usefulness of cannabinoids in pain conditions. However, in human experimental or clinical trials, no convincing reduction of acute pain, which may be caused by a pronociceptive, ECS-triggered mechanism on the level of the spinal cord, has been demonstrated. In contrast, in chronic pain and (painful) spasticity, an increasing number of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies have shown the efficacy of cannabinoids, which is combined with a narrow therapeutic index. Patients with unsatisfactory response to other methods of pain therapy and who were characterized by failed stress adaptation particularly benefited from treatment with cannabinoids. None of the attempts to overcome the disadvantage of the narrow therapeutic index, either by changing the route of application or by formulating balanced cannabinoid preparations, have resulted in a major breakthrough. Therefore, different methods of administration and other types of cannabinoids, such as endocannabinoid modulators, should be tested in future trials.
Loss of inhibitory synaptic transmission within the dorsal horn of the spinal cord plays a key role in the development of chronic pain following inflammation or nerve injury. Inhibitory postsynaptic transmission in the adult spinal cord involves mainly glycine. Cannabidiol is a nonpsychotropic plant constituent of Cannabis sativa. As we hypothesized that non-CB receptor mechanisms of cannabidiol might contribute to its anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects, we investigated the interaction of cannabidiol with strychnine-sensitive α1 and α1β glycine receptors by using the whole-cell patch clamp technique. Cannabidiol showed a positive allosteric modulating effect in a low micromolar concentration range (EC50 values: α1 = 12.3 ± 3.8 μmol/l and α1β = 18.1 ± 6.2 μmol/l). Direct activation of glycine receptors was observed at higher concentrations above 100 μmol/l (EC50 values: α1 = 132.4 ± 12.3 μmol/l and α1β = 144.3 ± 22.7 μmol/l). These in vitro results suggest that strychnine-sensitive glycine receptors may be a target for cannabidiol mediating some of its anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties.
BackgroundPathogenic autoantibodies targeting the recently identified leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein and the subunit 1 of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor induce autoimmune encephalitis. A comparison of brain metabolic patterns in 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography of anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein and anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis patients has not been performed yet and shall be helpful in differentiating these two most common forms of autoimmune encephalitis.MethodsThe brain 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose uptake from whole-body positron emission tomography of six anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis patients and four patients with anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein encephalitis admitted to Hannover Medical School between 2008 and 2012 was retrospectively analyzed and compared to matched controls.ResultsGroup analysis of anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate encephalitis patients demonstrated regionally limited hypermetabolism in frontotemporal areas contrasting an extensive hypometabolism in parietal lobes, whereas the anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein syndrome was characterized by hypermetabolism in cerebellar, basal ganglia, occipital and precentral areas and minor frontomesial hypometabolism.ConclusionsThis retrospective 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography study provides novel evidence for distinct brain metabolic patterns in patients with anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein and anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis.
Lidocaine-like sodium channel blocking drugs provide pain relief either by interrupting impulse conduction in neurons when applied locally in high concentrations or, when given systemically, by suppressing high-frequency ectopic discharges due to preferential drug binding to inactivated channel states. Lidocaine-like actions of opioids have frequently been demonstrated clinically. However, drug binding to resting and inactivated channel conformations has been studied systematically only in the case of meperidine. The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the effects of four currently used opioids on heterologously expressed neuronal (NaV(1.2)) voltage-gated sodium channels. Block of sodium currents was studied at hyperpolarized holding potentials and at depolarized potentials inducing either fast- or slow-inactivation. Sufentanil, fentanyl and tramadol but not morphine reversibly suppressed sodium inward currents at high concentrations (half-maximum blocking concentrations (IC50) 49+/-4, 141+/-6 and 103+/-8 microM) when depolarizations were started from hyperpolarized holding potentials. Short depolarizations inducing fast-inactivation and long prepulses inducing slow-inactivation significantly (*p < or = 0.001) increased the blocking potency for these opioids. 15% slow inactivated channels reduced the respective IC50 values to 5+/-3, 12+/-2 and 21+/-2 microM. These results show that: (1) Sufentanil, fentanyl and tramadol block voltage-gated sodium channels with half-maximum inhibitory concentrations similar to the IC50 reported for meperidine. (2) Slow inactivation--a physiological mechanism to suppress ectopic activity in response to slow shifts in membrane potential--increases binding affinity for sufentanil, fentanyl and tramadol. (3) Morphine has no such effects.
BackgroundThis study investigates differences in treatment and outcome of ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) between university and non-university hospitals in Germany.MethodsThis subanalysis of a prospective, observational cohort study was performed to identify independent risk factors for mortality by examining: baseline factors, ventilator settings (e.g., driving pressure), complications, and care settings—for example, case volume of ventilated patients, size/type of intensive care unit (ICU), and type of hospital (university/non-university hospital). To control for potentially confounding factors at ARDS onset and to verify differences in mortality, ARDS patients in university vs non-university hospitals were compared using additional multivariable analysis.ResultsOf the 7540 patients admitted to 95 ICUs from 18 university and 62 non-university hospitals in May 2004, 1028 received mechanical ventilation and 198 developed ARDS. Although the characteristics of ARDS patients were very similar, hospital mortality was considerably lower in university compared with non-university hospitals (39.3% vs 57.5%; p = 0.012). Treatment in non-university hospitals was independently associated with increased mortality (OR (95% CI): 2.89 (1.31–6.38); p = 0.008). This was confirmed by additional independent comparisons between the two patient groups when controlling for confounding factors at ARDS onset. Higher driving pressures (OR 1.10; 1 cmH2O increments) were also independently associated with higher mortality. Compared with non-university hospitals, higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (mean ± SD: 11.7 ± 4.7 vs 9.7 ± 3.7 cmH2O; p = 0.005) and lower driving pressures (15.1 ± 4.4 vs 17.0 ± 5.0 cmH2O; p = 0.02) were applied during therapeutic ventilation in university hospitals, and ventilation lasted twice as long (median (IQR): 16 (9–29) vs 8 (3–16) days; p < 0.001).ConclusionsMortality risk of ARDS patients was considerably higher in non-university compared with university hospitals. Differences in ventilatory care between hospitals might explain this finding and may at least partially imply regionalization of care and the export of ventilatory strategies to non-university hospitals.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1687-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.