Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2011
Protective effects of pentoxifylline and nimodipine on acoustic trauma in Guinea pig cochlea.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Kansu Leyla, Ozkarakas Haluk, Efendi Husnu, Okar Imer
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To examine the protective effects of the vasodilator and hemorheologically active drug pentoxifylline and the calcium channel blocker nimodipine on the cochlea after acoustic overexposure in guinea pigs.
METHODS: Eighteen guinea pigs were used. The animals were divided into 5 groups: 1) control, 2) acoustic trauma, 3) nimodipine plus acoustic trauma, 4) pentoxifylline plus acoustic trauma, and 5) pentoxifylline plus nimodipine plus acoustic trauma. Nimodipine was given to the guinea pigs 3 mg/kg intraperitoneally in a single dose; pentoxifylline was given 150 mg/kg in a single dose intraperitoneally. A gunnery range was used to create acoustic trauma. The auditory brainstem response of each guinea pig was determined first; then, the animals were killed, and their cochleas were examined under an electron microscope.
RESULTS: In the acoustic trauma group, negative auditory brainstem response potentials were seen as was well-adjusted cellular damage to the organ of Corti. In the pentoxifylline group, near-normal auditory brainstem response recordings and organ of Corti histologic findings were found. Organ of Corti damage was seen in the pentoxifylline plus nimodipine plus acoustic trauma group.
CONCLUSION: We determined that pentoxifylline was highly protective against noise, but nimodipine was not. Also, pentoxifylline and nimodipine, when used together, increased damage to the organ of Corti.
METHODS: Eighteen guinea pigs were used. The animals were divided into 5 groups: 1) control, 2) acoustic trauma, 3) nimodipine plus acoustic trauma, 4) pentoxifylline plus acoustic trauma, and 5) pentoxifylline plus nimodipine plus acoustic trauma. Nimodipine was given to the guinea pigs 3 mg/kg intraperitoneally in a single dose; pentoxifylline was given 150 mg/kg in a single dose intraperitoneally. A gunnery range was used to create acoustic trauma. The auditory brainstem response of each guinea pig was determined first; then, the animals were killed, and their cochleas were examined under an electron microscope.
RESULTS: In the acoustic trauma group, negative auditory brainstem response potentials were seen as was well-adjusted cellular damage to the organ of Corti. In the pentoxifylline group, near-normal auditory brainstem response recordings and organ of Corti histologic findings were found. Organ of Corti damage was seen in the pentoxifylline plus nimodipine plus acoustic trauma group.
CONCLUSION: We determined that pentoxifylline was highly protective against noise, but nimodipine was not. Also, pentoxifylline and nimodipine, when used together, increased damage to the organ of Corti.