Anesth Analg 2007;104:1563-1569
© 2007 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000263278.05423.a3
PAIN MECHANISMS
The Antinociceptive Effects of Local Injections of Propofol in Rats Are Mediated in Part by Cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 Receptors
Josée Guindon, DVM, PhD*,
Jesse LoVerme, PhD ,
Daniele Piomelli, PhD , and
Pierre Beaulieu, MD, PhD, FRCA*
From the *Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal–CHUM, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Departments of Psychiatry and Pharmacology, University of California, Irvine, California; and Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal–CHUM, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Pierre Beaulieu, Department of Anesthesiology, CHUM–Hôtel-Dieu, 3840 rue St-Urbain, Montréal, H2W 1T8, Québec, Canada. Address e-mail to pierre.beaulieu{at}umontreal.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Propofol can inhibit fatty acid amidohydrolase, the enzyme responsible for the metabolism of anandamide (an endocannabinoid). To study the potential antinociceptive effect of propofol, we administered different doses (0.005, 0.05, 0.5, 5, and 500 µg) of the anesthetic in the hind paw of animals to determine an ED50. To further investigate the mechanisms by which propofol produced its antinociceptive effect, we used specific antagonists for the cannabinoid CB1 (AM251) and CB2 (AM630) receptors and measured fatty-acid amide/endocannabinoid (anandamide, 2-arachidonylglycerol, and palmitoylethanolamide) concentrations in skin paw tissues.
METHODS: Formalin tests were performed on 65 Wistar rats allocated to six different groups: 1) control (IntralipidTM 10%); 2) propofol (ED50 dose); 3) AM251; 4) AM251 + propofol; 5) AM630; 6) AM630 + propofol. Drugs were injected subcutaneously in the dorsal surface of the hind paw (50 µL) 15 min before 2.5% formalin injection into the same paw. Fatty-acid amide/endocannabinoid levels were measured by high performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis.
RESULTS: Propofol produced a dose-dependent antinociceptive effect for the early and late phases of the formalin test with an ED50 of 0.08 ± 0.061 µg for the latter phase. This effect was antagonized by AM251 and AM630. It was locally mediated, since a higher dose of propofol given in the contralateral paw was not antinociceptive. Finally, only paw concentrations of palmitoylethanolamide were significantly increased.
CONCLUSION: In a test of inflammatory pain, locally injected propofol decreased pain behavior in a dose-dependent manner. This antinociceptive effect was mediated, in part, by CB1 and CB2 receptors.
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Chen, S. L. Lee, and R. A. Peterfreund
New Therapeutic Agents for Diabetes Mellitus: Implications for Anesthetic Management
Anesth. Analg.,
June 1, 2009;
108(6):
1803 - 1810.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Fassoulaki, A. Melemeni, A. Paraskeva, I. Siafaka, and C. Sarantopoulos
Postoperative Pain and Analgesic Requirements After Anesthesia with Sevoflurane, Desflurane or Propofol
Anesth. Analg.,
November 1, 2008;
107(5):
1715 - 1719.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|