Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dunbar, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Karamian, I. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dunbar, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Karamian, I. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2003, Vol. 91, No. 3 427-429
© 2003 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Short Communications

Cross-tolerance between spinal neostigmine and morphine in the rat

S. A. Dunbar* and I. G. Karamian

Department of Anesthesiology, Tufts University School of Medicine Baystate Medical Center Springfield, MA 01199, USA

Corresponding author. E-mail: Stuart.Dunbar@bhs.org

Background. Direct or indirect acting cholinergic muscarinic agonists such as neostigmine, are potent antinociceptives when administered intrathecally (i.t.). This study examines whether spinal neostigmine tolerance and cross-tolerance to spinal morphine occurs.

Methods. Rats (32/group) were implanted with miniosmotic pumps delivering either i.t. saline 1 µl h–1 (S), morphine 10 nmol µl–1 h–1 (M), or neostigmine 3 nmol µl–1 h–1 (N). Latencies (infrared thermal withdrawal rear paw) were measured daily for 6 days after which four animals from each group were given one i.t. challenge dose of morphine (m) 0.1, 1, 10, or 100 nmol, or neostigmine (n) 0.3, 3, 10, or 30 nmol.

Results. Neostigmine and morphine-infused animals both developed tolerance to spinal neostigmine, but neostigmine-infused animals showed no significant cross-tolerance to spinal morphine; mean ED50 nmol (CI 95%) dose–response values were Sn 2.6 (1.9–3.5), Mn 15.6 (9.9–24.6)*, Nn 18.7 (11.7–29.8)*, Sm 0.7 (0.4–1.1), Nm 1.2 (0.8–2.0), Mm 152 (50–461)* (*significance vs saline infused control group).

Conclusion. Thus, unidirectional cross-tolerance from morphine to neostigmine was evident. Previous studies suggest morphine has a cholinergic mechanism of action partially accounting for its antinociceptive effect, which may explain this observed unidirectional cross-tolerance.

Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 427–9


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
Y.-Y. Chia, T.-H. Chang, K. Liu, H.-C. Chang, N.-H. Ko, and Y.-M. Wang
The Efficacy of Thoracic Epidural Neostigmine Infusion After Thoracotomy
Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2006; 102(1): 201 - 208.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.