Repeated electrical stimulations as a tool to evoke temporal summation of nociceptive inputs in healthy, non-medicated experimental sheep

Rohrbach, Hélène; Andersen, Ole Kæseler; Zeiter, Stephan; Wieling, R.; Spadavecchia, Claudia

doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.02.008

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Particularly with regard to pharmacokinetic profiles, large animal models such as dogs, sheep, and primates  offer similar metabolic functions [458, 475]. Experimental threshold models have been described for these species (see, for example, in dog [476-478] and in sheep [479, 480]. Such models, while useful, may not capture the complexities of the inflammatory/nerve injury pain states.…”

Section: Current Spinal Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current and Future Issues in the Development of Spinal Agents for the Management of Pain

Yaksh

Fisher²,

Hockman³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Targeting analgesic drugs for spinal delivery reflects the fact that while the conscious experience of pain is mediated supraspinally, input initiated by high intensity stimuli, tissue injury and/or nerve injury is encoded at the level of the spinal dorsal horn and this output informs the brain as to the peripheral environment. This encoding process is subject to strong upregulation resulting in hyperesthetic states and downregulation reducing the ongoing processing of nociceptive stimuli reversing the hyperesthesia and pain processing. The present review addresses the biology of spinal nociceptive processing as relevant to the effects of intrathecally-delivered drugs in altering pain processing following acute stimulation, tissue inflammation/injury and nerve injury. The review covers i) the major classes of spinal agents currently employed as intrathecal analgesics (opioid agonists, alpha 2 agonists; sodium channel blockers; calcium channel blockers; NMDA blockers; GABA A/B agonists; COX inhibitors; ii) ongoing developments in the pharmacology of spinal therapeutics focusing on less studied agents/targets (cholinesterase inhibition; Adenosine agonists; iii) novel intrathecal targeting methodologies including gene-based approaches (viral vectors, plasmids, interfering RNAs); antisense, and toxins (botulinum toxins; resniferatoxin, substance P Saporin); and iv) issues relevant to intrathecal drug delivery (neuraxial drug distribution), infusate delivery profile, drug dosing, formulation and principals involved in the preclinical evaluation of intrathecal drug safety.

show abstract

Section: Current Spinal Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current and Future Issues in the Development of Spinal Agents for the Management of Pain

Yaksh

Fisher²,

Hockman³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the extensive use of nociceptive tests for quantification of conditions characterised by increased sensitivity in humans and rodents [31] , its application has only recently been extended to include larger animal species (e.g. dogs, cattle, horses, sheep, poultry) [14] , [23] , [25] , [44] , [45] , [49] , [50] . Livestock, in particular, have received increasing attention due to their exposure to tissues damage and consequent inflammatory responses caused by husbandry procedures (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of a handheld Pressure Application Measurement device for the characterisation of mechanical nociceptive thresholds in intact pig tails

Giminiani

Sandercock

Malcolm

et al. 2016

Physiology & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of nociceptive thresholds is employed in animals and humans to evaluate changes in sensitivity potentially arising from tissue damage. Its application on the intact pig tail might represent a suitable method to assess changes in nociceptive thresholds arising from tail injury, such as tail docking or tail biting. The Pressure Application Measurement (PAM) device is used here for the first time on the tail of pigs to determine the reliability of the methods and to provide novel data on mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNT) associated with four different age groups (9, 17, 24 and 32 weeks) and with proximity of the target region to the body of the animal. We recorded an overall acceptable level of intra-individual reliability, with mean values of CV ranging between 30.1 and 32.6%. Across all age groups, the first single measurement of MNT recorded at region 1 (proximal) was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than the following two. This was not observed at tail regions 2 and 3 (more distal). Age had a significant effect (P < 0.05) on the mean thresholds of nociception with increasing age corresponding to higher thresholds. Furthermore, a significant effect of proximity of tail region to the body was observed (P < 0.05), with MNT being higher in the proximal tail region in pigs of 9, 17 and 24 weeks of age. There was also a significant positive correlation (P < 0.05) between mechanical nociceptive thresholds and age/body size of the animals.To the best of our knowledge, no other investigation of tail nociceptive thresholds has been performed with the PAM device or alternative methods to obtain mechanical nociceptive thresholds in intact tails of pigs of different age/body size. The reliability of the data obtained with the PAM device support its use in the measurement of mechanical nociceptive threshold in pig tails. This methodological approach is possibly suitable for assessing changes in tail stump MNTs after tail injury caused by tail docking and biting.

show abstract

“…This study represents a logical consequence of the current subjective statements in the veterinary literature regarding the use of reflexes in the neurological evaluation of dogs, and this study provides baseline information on the assessment of reflex accuracy. Additionally, other studies that assessed the answer of different reflexes examined only healthy probands and thus our study design is comparable among the literature [11, 39, 40, 51, 52].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of interobserver agreement between the evaluation of bicipital and the patellar tendon reflex in healthy dogs

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reliability of reflex-assessment is currently debatable, with current literature regarding the patellar tendon reflex (PTR) as highly reliable, while the biceps tendon reflex (BTR) is regarded to be of low reliability in the dog. Such statements are, however, based on subjective observations rather than on an empirical study. The goals of this study were three-fold: (1) the quantification of the interobserver agreement (IA) on the evaluation of the canine bicipital (BTR) and patellar tendon (PTR) reflex in healthy dogs, (2) to compare the IA of the BTR and PTR evaluation and (3) the identification of intrinsic ( sex , age , fur length , weight ) and extrinsic ( observer´s expertise , body side ) risk factors on the IA of both reflexes. The observers were subdivided into three groups based on their expected level of expertise (neurologists = highest -, practitioners = middle–and veterinary students = lowest level of expertise). For the BTR, 54 thoracic limbs were analyzed and compared to the evaluation of the PTR on 64 pelvic limbs. Each observer had to evaluate the reflex presence (RP) ( present or absent ) and the reflex activity (RA) using a 5-point ordinal scale. Multiple reliability coefficients were calculated. The influence of the risk factors has been calculated using a mixed regression-model. The Odds Ratio for each factor was presented. The higher the level of expertise the higher was the IA of the BTR. For RP(BTR), IA was highest for neurologists and for RA(BTR) the IA was lowest for students. The level of expertise had a significant impact on the degree of the IA in the evaluation of the bicipital tendon reflex: for the RA(BTR), practitioners had a 3.4-times (p = 0.003) and students a 7.0-times (p < 0.001) higher chance of discordance. In longhaired dogs the chance of disagreement was 2.6-times higher compared to shorthaired dogs in the evaluation of RA(BTR) (p = 0.003). Likewise, the IA of the RP(PTR) was the higher the higher the observers´ expertise was with neurologists having significantly highest values (p < 0.001). The RA(PTR) has been evaluated more consistent by practitioners and students than the RA(BTR). For practitioners this difference was significant (< 0.01). Our data suggests that neurologists assess the bicipital and patellar tendon reflex in dogs most reliably. None of the examined risk factors had a significant impact on the degree of IA in the evaluation of RP(PTR), while students had a 4.4-times higher chance of discordance when evaluating the RA(PTR) compared to the other groups. This effect was significant (p < 0.001). Neurologists can reliably assess the bicipital and patellar tendon reflex in healthy dogs. Observer´s level of expertise and the fur length of the dog affect the degree of IA of RA(BTR). The influence of the observer´s expertise is higher on the evaluation of the BTR than on...

show abstract

Repeated electrical stimulations as a tool to evoke temporal summation of nociceptive inputs in healthy, non-medicated experimental sheep

Cited by 8 publications

References 28 publications

Current and Future Issues in the Development of Spinal Agents for the Management of Pain

Current and Future Issues in the Development of Spinal Agents for the Management of Pain

Application of a handheld Pressure Application Measurement device for the characterisation of mechanical nociceptive thresholds in intact pig tails

Comparison of interobserver agreement between the evaluation of bicipital and the patellar tendon reflex in healthy dogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About