Functional changes in the inhibitory effect of spinal cannabinoid (CB) receptor activation in nerve injured rats
Abstract
Recent interest has focused on the potential of cannabinoids as novel analgesics. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of a potent cannabinoid agonist, HU210, on somatosensory transmission in a model of neuropathic pain. Here, the effects of spinal versus systemic administration of HU210 on noxious and innocuous evoked responses of spinal neurones of nerve injured (selective ligation of spinal nerves L5-L6) and sham operated rats were compared 14-17 days post-surgical intervention. Spinal administration of HU210 (0.5-500 ng/50 microl) significantly reduced the C-fibre mediated post-discharge response of spinal neurones in sham operated, but not nerve injured rats. By contrast, spinal HU210 significantly reduced Adelta-fibre evoked responses of spinal neurones in both sham operated and nerve injured rats.Systemic administration of HU210 (6-60 microg/kg) significantly reduced C- and Adelta-fibre evoked responses of spinal neurones in sham operated rats. HU210 (60 microg/kg) inhibited the overall C-fibre evoked response (54+/-8% of control, p<0.01), post-discharge response (28+/-12% of control, p<0.01), and Adelta-fibre evoked (48+/-5% of control p<0.01) responses of spinal neurones. In nerve injured rats, systemic administration of HU210 did not significantly reduce C- or Abeta-fibre evoked responses of spinal neurones. This study demonstrates plasticity of the spinal cannabinoid receptor system following peripheral nerve injury.
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?
Spinal, but not systemic, administration of HU-210 reduces Aδ fiber-evoked responses on spinal wide dynamic range neurons in both sham and SNL rats, whereas HU-210 showed no effect on C-fiber responses of SNL rats.
“Spinal, but not systemic, administration of HU-210 has been reported to reduce Aδ fiber-evoked responses on spinal WDR neurons in both shams and SNL rats, whereas HU-210 showed no effect on C-fiber responses of SNL rats.82”
From Cannabinoids as Pharmacotherapies for Neuropathic Pain: From the Bench to the Bedside (2009) · cites this paper as [82]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 33 · Cited by 25
- Authors
- Chapman, V.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Chapman, V.
- ORCID
- Chapman, V.
- Venue
- Neuropharmacology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 870-877
- ISSN
- 0028-3908 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1967517546
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2015: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 1.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neuropharmacology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Royal Society
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
- Keywords
- cannabinoid receptors, HU-210, neuropathic pain, spinal cord, peripheral nerve injury, cannabinoid analgesia, receptor plasticity, spinal nerve ligation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Cannabinoids, Evoked Potentials, Hyperalgesia, Ligation, Male, Neural Inhibition, Pain Measurement, Receptors, Drug, Spinal Cord, Spinal Nerves, Dronabinol, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Receptors, Cannabinoid, 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
