Cited by 70Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPain Management and TreatmentIon Channels and Receptors

Pharmacological sensitivity and gene expression analysis of the tibial nerve injury model of neuropathic pain

Hofmann, Heiko A., De Vry, Jean, Siegling, Angela, Spreyer, Peter, Denzer, Dirk·2003·European Journal of Pharmacology

Abstract

The tibial nerve injury model is a novel, surgically uncomplicated, rat model of neuropathic pain based on a unilateral transection (neurotomy) of the tibial branch of the sciatic nerve. The aim of the present study was to describe some behavioral and molecular features of the model, and to test its sensitivity to a number of drugs which are currently used for the treatment of neuropathic pain. The model was characterized by a pronounced mechanical allodynia which was present in all subjects and a less robust thermal hyperalgesia. Mechanical allodynia developed within 2 weeks post-surgery and was reliably present for at least 9 weeks. Neurotomized rats showed no autotomy and their body weight developed normally. Gene expression in ipsilateral L5 dorsal root ganglia, analyzed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR), showed a pronounced up-regulation of galanin and vasointestinal peptide (VIP). This up-regulation developed rapidly (within 1 to 2 days following neurotomy) and remained present for at least 12 days. On the other hand, expression of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and substance P mRNA was down-regulated 12 days following neurotomy. Mechanical allodynia was completely reversed by morphine [minimal effective dose (MED): 8 mg/kg, i.p.] and partially reversed by carbamazepine (MED: 64 mg/kg, i.p.), baclofen (MED: 3 mg/kg, i.p.) and amitriptyline (trend for efficacy at 32 mg/kg, i.p.), but not by gabapentin (50-100 mg/kg, i.p.). The finding that the tibial nerve injury model shows a robust and persistent mechanical allodynia which is sensitive to a number of established analgesics, as well as a gene expression profile which is compatible with that obtained in other models of neuropathic pain, further supports its validity as a reliable and surgically uncomplicated model for the study of neuropathic pain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0014-2999(03)01753-9

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hofmann, H. A., De Vry, J., Siegling, A., Spreyer, P., & Denzer, D.
Affiliations
Bayer (Germany) (DE)
Corresponding author
Denzer, Dirk
Venue
European Journal of Pharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-05
Volume
470
Issue
1-2
Pages
17-25
ISSN
0014-2999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2053875152
Cited by
70
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Pharmacology (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, mechanical allodynia, thermal hyperalgesia, galanin, vasoactive intestinal peptide, calcitonin gene-related peptide, substance P, analgesic sensitivity, morphine, carbamazepine, baclofen, amitriptyline, gabapentin
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Animals, Disease Models, Animal, Gene Expression Regulation, Male, Tibial Nerve, Rats, Wistar, Pain Threshold, Tibial Neuropathy, Rats

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