The Journal of pharmacy and pharmacology · 2021
Antimalarial primaquine for skin infiltration analgesia in rats.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chang Ying-Jen, Liu Kuo-Sheng, Wang Jhi-Joung, Chen Yu-Wen, Hung Ching-Hsia
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to estimate the ability of antimalarial medications to induce local infiltration analgesia.
METHODS: Using a rat model of skin infiltration anaesthesia, the effects of antimalarial medications (primaquine, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine and amodiaquine) were compared with the application of lidocaine.
KEY FINDINGS: At a dose of 3 μmol, primaquine and chloroquine displayed better potency (all P < 0.05) and greater duration (all P < 0.01) of cutaneous analgesia than lidocaine, whereas the other antimalarial medications showed a similar potency and duration of cutaneous analgesia when compared with lidocaine. When a dose of 3 μmol antimalarial medication was used, primaquine was the most potent and had the longest duration of action among four antimalarial medications. The relative potency ranking (ED50, 50% effective dose) has been found to be primaquine [2.10 (1.87 - 2.37) μmol] > lidocaine [6.27 (5.32 -7.39) μmol] (P < 0.01). Infiltration analgesia of skin with primaquine had a greater duration of action than did lidocaine on the equipotent (ED25, ED50, ED75) basis (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Primaquine and chloroquine have greater potency and longer lasting skin analgesia when compared with lidocaine, while the other antimalarials display a similar potency in comparison with lidocaine.
METHODS: Using a rat model of skin infiltration anaesthesia, the effects of antimalarial medications (primaquine, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine and amodiaquine) were compared with the application of lidocaine.
KEY FINDINGS: At a dose of 3 μmol, primaquine and chloroquine displayed better potency (all P < 0.05) and greater duration (all P < 0.01) of cutaneous analgesia than lidocaine, whereas the other antimalarial medications showed a similar potency and duration of cutaneous analgesia when compared with lidocaine. When a dose of 3 μmol antimalarial medication was used, primaquine was the most potent and had the longest duration of action among four antimalarial medications. The relative potency ranking (ED50, 50% effective dose) has been found to be primaquine [2.10 (1.87 - 2.37) μmol] > lidocaine [6.27 (5.32 -7.39) μmol] (P < 0.01). Infiltration analgesia of skin with primaquine had a greater duration of action than did lidocaine on the equipotent (ED25, ED50, ED75) basis (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Primaquine and chloroquine have greater potency and longer lasting skin analgesia when compared with lidocaine, while the other antimalarials display a similar potency in comparison with lidocaine.