1 The interactions of a-bungarotoxin or tubocurarine with the neuromuscular block and endplate depolarization induced by succinylcholine (SCh) in the phrenic nerve-diaphragm preparation of mice were studied in order to elucidate the role of depolarization by SCh in the neuromuscular blockade. 2 The SCh concentrations required to depress the indirect twitch response by 20% and the evoked endplate potential in cut muscle preparations by 80% were 10M and 6pm, respectively, while only 2 pm SCh was needed to induce maximal endplate depolarization from -80 mV to about -60 mV. 3 SCh blocked the neuromuscular transmission synergistically with either a-bungarotoxin or tubocurarine. There was an initial partial reversal of the neuromuscular inhibition caused by tubocurarine, but not that by a-bungarotoxin. 4 a-Bungarotoxin (0.025 pM) antagonized SCh (10 pM)-induced depolarization more effectively than it depressed miniature endplate potentials and the antagonism was insurmountable by increasing SCh concentration. By contrast, tubocurarine preferentially depressed miniature endplate potentials and antagonized SCh-depolarization competitively. 5 The above difference was attributed to the irreversible nature of o-bungarotoxin binding to acetylcholine receptors, to the slow diffusion of the toxin molecule into the synaptic cleft and thus to the more rapid binding with perijunctional receptors compared with junctional ones. 6 It is concluded that the sustained depolarization of the endplate by SCh results largely from an action on the perijunctional receptor in mice and, unlike cats, the neuromuscular block by SCh is not due to the depolarization per se but rather to a direct attenuation of endplate potential.

Abstract-The

The effects of nicardipine, a dihydropyridine Ca2(+)-channel antagonist, on neuromuscular transmission and impulse-evoked release of acetylcholine were compared with those of nifedipine. In the isolated mouse phrenic nerve diaphragm, nicardipine (50 microM), but not nifedipine (100 microM), induced neuromuscular block, fade of tetanic contraction, and dropout or all-or-none block of end-plate potentials. Nicardipine had no significant effect on the resting membrane potential and the amplitude of miniature end-plate potentials but increased the frequency and caused the appearance of large size miniature potentials. The quantal contents of evoked end-plate potentials were increased. In the presence of tubocurarine, however, nicardipine depressed the amplitude of end-plate potentials. The compound nerve action potential was also decreased. It is concluded that nicardipine blocks neuromuscular transmission by acting on Na+ channels and inhibits axonal conduction. Nicardipine appeared to affect the evoked release of acetylcholine by dual mechanisms, i.e., an enhancement presumably by an agonist action on Ca2+ channels, like Bay K 8644 and nifedipine, and inhibition by an effect on Na+ channels, like verapamil and diltiazem. In contrast with its inactivity on the amplitude of miniature end-plate potentials, depolarization of the end plate in response to succinylcholine was greatly depressed. The contractile response of baby chick biventer cervicis muscle to exogenous acetylcholine was noncompetitively antagonized by nicardipine (10 microM), but was unaffected by nifedipine (30 microM). These results may implicate that nicardipine blocks the postsynaptic acetylcholine receptor channel by enhancing receptor desensitization or by a use-dependent effect.