Pharmacological evaluation of the selective spinal nerve ligation model of neuropathic pain in the rat
Abstract
Rodent models of neuropathic pain are used to investigate the underlying mechanisms of pain associated with damage to peripheral nerves and to evaluate the efficacy of novel compounds. However, few models have been adequately characterized and the validity of many models remains unclear. The present experiment examined the activity of known anti-allodynic compounds in the L5 spinal nerve ligation (SNL) model of peripheral mononeuropathy in the rat, a modified version of the L5/L6 SNL model [S.H. Kim, J.M. Chung, An experimental model for peripheral neuropathy produced by segmental spinal nerve ligation in the rat, Pain 50 (1992) 355-363]. Tactile sensitivity was measured 7-21 days post-surgery using von Frey monofilaments before and following treatment with gabapentin (30, 60 and 120 mg/kg), morphine (1, 3 and 6 mg/kg), amitriptyline (1.5, 3 and 10 mg/kg), fluoxetine (3, 10 and 30 mg/kg), WIN55,212-2 (0.5, 1 and 2.5 mg/kg), indomethacin (1 and 5 mg/kg) or U-50,488H (3 and 6 mg/kg). Compared to sham-operated control animals, L5 SNL animals displayed significant tactile allodynia in the ipsilateral hindpaw that was completely reversed by treatment with gabapentin, morphine, and WIN55,212-2, partially reversed by amitriptyline and fluoxetine, and unaffected by U-50,488H or indomethacin. The robust effects of the non-selective cannabinoid receptor agonist WIN55,212-2 and morphine support reports in the literature that systemic cannabinoid receptor agonists and opioids are active in neuropathic pain. These results suggest that the L5 SNL model can be utilized to determine the anti-allodynic activity of novel compounds.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Gabapentin successfully attenuated mechanical allodynia in the SNL model, whereas amitriptyline, fluoxetine, and indomethacin failed to show similar effects.
“Gabapentin successfully attenuated mechanical allodynia in this model, however, several other commonly prescribed neuropathic pain medications including amitriptyline, fluoxetine and indomethacin failed to show similar effects.80”
From Cannabinoids as Pharmacotherapies for Neuropathic Pain: From the Bench to the Bedside (2009) · cites this paper as [80]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 108
- Authors
- LaBuda, C. J., & Little, P. J.
- Corresponding author
- LaBuda, Christopher J.
- Venue
- Journal of Neuroscience Methods
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 144
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 175-181
- ISSN
- 0165-0270 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1969561355
- Cited by
- 108
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 4.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience Methods (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Ion Channels and Receptors
- Keywords
- neuropathic pain, spinal nerve ligation, allodynia, tactile sensitivity, gabapentin, morphine, WIN 55,212-2, cannabinoid receptor agonists, amitriptyline, fluoxetine, U50,488H, indomethacin, peripheral mononeuropathy, rat model
- MeSH terms
- Analgesics, Analgesics, Opioid, Animals, Denervation, Disease Models, Animal, Ligation, Male, Morpholines, Naphthalenes, Neuralgia, Nociceptors, Peripheral Nervous System Diseases, Physical Stimulation, Spinal Nerves, Treatment Outcome, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Neurosurgical Procedures, Receptors, Cannabinoid, Benzoxazines, Rats, Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review