JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Anesth Analg 2008; 106:321-327
© 2008 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000296474.79437.23
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gordon, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Dionne, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gordon, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Dionne, R. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Pain Mechanisms
Right arrow Regional Anesthesia
Right arrow Pain
Right arrow Pharmacology

ANALGESIA

The Differential Effects of Bupivacaine and Lidocaine on Prostaglandin E2 Release, Cyclooxygenase Gene Expression and Pain in a Clinical Pain Model

Sharon M. Gordon, DDS, MPH, PhD*, Brian P. Chuang, DMD, MS{dagger}, Xiao Min Wang, MD, PhD{ddagger}, May A. Hamza, MD, Janet S. Rowan, RN§, Jaime S. Brahim, DDS, MS||, and Raymond A. Dionne, DDS, PhD{ddagger}

From the *University of Maryland, School of Dentistry, Baltimore, Maryland; {dagger}Practice of Endodontics, Boston, Massachusetts; {ddagger}National Institute of Nursing Research; §Department of Nursing, Clinical Research Center; ||National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland; and ¶Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo Egypt.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Sharon M. Gordon, University of MD, School of Dentistry, Baltimore, MD. Address e-mail to SGordon{at}umaryland.edu.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In addition to blocking nociceptive input from surgical sites, long-acting local anesthetics might directly modulate inflammation. In the present study, we describe the proinflammatory effects of bupivacaine on local prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) production and cyclooxygenase (COX) gene expression that increases postoperative pain in human subjects.

METHODS: Subjects (n = 114) undergoing extraction of impacted third molars received either 2% lidocaine or 0.5% bupivacaine before surgery and either rofecoxib 50 mg or placebo orally 90 min before surgery and for the following 48 h. Oral mucosal biopsies were taken before surgery and 48 h after surgery. After extraction, a microdialysis probe was placed at the surgical site for PGE2 and thromboxane B2 (TXB2) measurements.

RESULTS: The bupivacaine/rofecoxib group reported significantly less pain, as assessed by a visual analog scale, compared with the other three treatment groups over the first 4 h. However, the bupivacaine/placebo group reported significantly more pain at 24 h and PGE2 levels during the first 4 h were significantly higher than the other three treatment groups. Moreover, bupivacaine significantly increased COX-2 gene expression at 48 h as compared with the lidocaine/placebo group. Thromboxane levels were not significantly affected by any of the treatments, indicating that the effects seen were attributable to inhibition of COX-2, but not COX-1.

CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that bupivacaine stimulates COX-2 gene expression after tissue injury, which is associated with higher PGE2 production and pain after the local anesthetic effect dissipates.

Tissue injury associated with surgical trauma directly and indirectly leads to the activation of nociceptors,1 with increased expression of proinflammatory cytokines and induction of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2),2 leading to peripheral and central sensitization with subsequent hyperalgesia.3 Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) is an abundant eicosanoid released after surgical trauma and has been associated with inflammation and pain.4 We have previously shown that increases in PGE2 at the surgical site are associated with the onset of pain and inflammation in the third molar extraction model.5–7 Buvanendran et al.8 have shown an increase of the PGE2 concentration in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) after hip arthroplasty in humans. The increase in PGE2 levels is associated with up-regulation of COX-2 both at the injury site9,10 and in the spinal cord.9,11,12 This widespread induction of COX-2 indicates the need to intervene at central as well as peripheral targets to suppress synthesis of proinflammatory prostanoids contributing to pain and inflammation.

Long-acting local anesthetics (LAs) such as bupivacaine and ropivacaine are used to provide prolonged perioperative pain relief and to attenuate the development of postoperative sensitization that manifests as hyperalgesia after the anesthetic effect has dissipated, thereby reducing postoperative pain and morbidity and accelerating recovery.13–16 Attenuation of postoperative pain beyond the duration of the commonly used 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine has been demonstrated for both etidocaine17 and bupivacaine13,16,18 and is additive with the effects of a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) administered preemptively before a minor surgical procedure.19 Treatment aimed at reducing sensory inflow into the central nervous system (CNS), such as regional local anesthesia during surgery, may be enhanced by COX-2 inhibition.

Although LAs are used for their conduction-blocking activity, they have actions on other cellular targets that could modulate inflammation.20 There are accumulating data suggesting an antiinflammatory action of LAs. For example, prolonged sciatic nerve block by bupivacaine limits edema and related pain after carrageenan-induced inflammation in the rat.21 Moreover, bupivacaine regulates the systemic inflammatory response elicited by carrageenan in an ex vivo murine model of local inflammation.22 Intratracheally instilled ropivacaine, in both low and clinically relevant doses, shows strong antiinflammatory effects on neutrophils, endothelial and epithelial lung cells in vitro and in vivo. Pham-Marcou et al.23 report that prolonged nerve block by 70% ethanol in mice decreased not only the local inflammatory reaction observed after carrageenan injection, but also its systemic consequences.

The present investigation studied the effect of two commonly used LAs (lidocaine and bupivacaine) on local COX-2 gene expression, PGE2 production and postoperative pain, and their interactions with a selective COX-2 inhibitor (rofecoxib) in the oral surgery model.

METHODS

The study design was a double-blind clinical trial with randomized parallel groups of subjects undergoing the surgical removal of impacted third molars, a clinical model of tissue injury. Subjects were outpatients referred for the extraction of impacted third molars. The surgical and experimental procedures were explained verbally and in writing, and written informed consent was obtained in accordance with, and with permission from, the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research IRB. Subjects were men or women between the ages of 16 to 35 yr in general good health (ASA status I or II) with the clinical indication for third molar removal. Surgical criteria included the presence of two partial or fully impacted mandibular third molars in order to evaluate subjects experiencing similar pain levels.

Exclusion criteria included allergy to aspirin, NSAIDs, sulfites, or amide anesthetics; a history of peptic ulcers or gastrointestinal bleeding; and chronic use of medications confounding the assessment of the inflammatory response or analgesia, e.g., NSAIDs, COX-2 inhibitors, antihistamines, steroids, and antidepressants. Patients were also excluded for clinical signs suggestive of infection, inflammation, or preexisting pain or if unusual surgical difficulty occurred during the actual surgery. Pregnant or lactating females were ineligible.

Subjects were randomly assigned to either rofecoxib 50 mg or placebo orally, and local anesthesia 2% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine (Astra-Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, DE) or 0.5% bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine (Abbott Laboratories, Abbot Park, IL) in a factorial design. The first dose of medication (rofecoxib or placebo) was administered in the clinic 90 min before the surgery. All subjects were titrated immediately before surgery with IV administered midazolam, followed by LA administration. Subjects were tested for subjective signs of lower lip anesthesia 5 min postinjection and reinjected, if necessary, to achieve adequate local anesthesia. After demonstration of satisfactory local anesthesia, a 3-mm diameter tissue biopsy was taken from the area adjacent to one of the mandibular third molars. Two mandibular third molars were extracted and a surgical difficulty score was assigned for each tooth.

After extraction, a microdialysis probe (CMA/20 Microdialysis Probe; CMA/Microdialysis, North Chelmsford, MA) was placed along the buccal aspect of the mandible, beneath the mucogingival flap elevated for the surgical procedure. The probe fiber consists of a 10-mm flexible, nonmetallic, semipermeable dialysis membrane with a molecular cutoff ranging from 3000 to 20,000 Da. The probes were secured to an adjacent tooth with silk suture and the flap closed in the usual fashion using 3-0 chromic gut suture. Sterile lactated Ringer’s solution was pumped at 10 µL/min and samples collected at 20-min intervals after the completion of surgery, before pain onset. Subjects remained under observation for the first 4 h after surgery to evaluate pain and adverse events and collect samples by microdialysis. During the immediate postoperative period, subjects were allowed rescue medication after 1 h of evaluation with 975 mg of acetaminophen. Up to 60 mg of codeine could be requested as a second rescue drug if pain was unrelieved by acetaminophen. Patients rated their pain intensity every 20 min for the first 4 postoperative h and at 24 and 48 h using 100-mm visual analog scale. The subsequent doses of the study drug (rofecoxib or placebo) were self-administered by the patient at home after discharge.

At the conclusion of the observation period, the microdialysis probes were removed and the patients were discharged in the care of a responsible adult with two separate bottles of rescue pain medications: acetaminophen and codeine, with instructions for administration and how to record drug intake and pain in a diary with instructions to first take 975 mg of acetaminophen for pain unrelieved by the study medication and to use codeine 30 to 60 mg if pain was still unrelieved an hour after taking the acetaminophen. Patients recorded pain intensity at 24 and 48 h and were telephoned at 24 h to remind them to complete the pain questionnaires and to take the pain medication. At 48 h, patients returned for a second tissue biopsy along with completed pain and analgesic diaries.

Microdialysis samples were placed on dry ice after the collection period, and stored at –70°C until assayed by enzyme immunoassay using commercially available enzyme immunoassay kits for immunoreactive PGE2 or immunoreactive thromboxane B2 (TXB2) (Cayman Chemical Company, Ann Arbor, MI) following the manufacturer’s recommended methods.

Oral mucosal biopsies (n = 60) were used to detect gene expression using ABI Prism 7900 HT Sequence Detection System (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). All reagents were purchased from Applied Biosystems and 2 µg of DNase-treated RNA was used to synthesize cDNA using random primers from the High-Capacity cDNA Archive Kit according to the manufacturer’s instruction. Polymerase chain reaction was performed with cDNA template using the PCR Master Mix with AmpErase UNG. Sequence–specific primers and TaqMan MGB probes were purchased from Assays-on-Demand Gene expression product. Quantification of gene expression was performed in a 20-µL reaction (384-well plate) and each sample was run in triplicate. The housekeeping gene 18S rRNA was used as endogenous control and negative controls were processed under the same conditions without a cDNA template. Data acquisition was conducted using User Bulletin #2 software (v1.6, Applied Biosystems). The threshold cycle (Ct) of 18 rRNA was used to normalize target gene expression ({Delta}Ct) to correct for experimental variations. The relative change in gene expression ({Delta}{Delta}Ct) was used for comparison of the gene expression in postsurgery tissue versus that in presurgery tissue using paired t-test. Two-sided {alpha} level was set P < 0.05. Data were analyzed using SPSS v. 13.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL). Unless otherwise specified, statistical significance was evaluated by means of one-way ANOVA followed by Newman–Keuls post hoc test with significance level of P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Of 136 patients enrolled, 22 failed to complete the data collection period, leaving 114 subjects remaining in the study to completion. Reasons for elimination included: failing to complete pain questionnaires at later time points, requiring a NSAID rescue analgesic (ketorolac tromethamine) to manage pain during the immediate postoperative period, or taking other analgesics aside from what was provided for rescue. The demographic and surgical variables of the subjects are summarized in Table 1, demonstrating that the four groups were similar in age, height, weight, surgical difficulty and the amount of LA and midazolam received.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Demographic and Surgical Features of the Patient Sample

 

Comparisons of pain intensity during the immediate postoperative period (Fig. 1) illustrate a gradual increase in pain intensity as the effect of the LA dissipated. The bupivacaine/rofecoxib group reported significantly less pain (P < 0.05) over the 4-h observation period in comparison to the other three treatment groups that did not differ significantly from each other. However, the pain suppression for the bupivacaine/rofecoxib group did not differ from that of the lidocaine/rofecoxib group at 24 or 48 h (Fig. 2). Moreover, there was significantly more pain reported by the bupivacaine/placebo group compared with the other three groups at the 24 h time point (P < 0.05). Although not statistically significant at the 48 h time point, the bupivacaine/placebo group reported higher pain intensity. As expected, acetaminophen intake was significantly lower in both rofecoxib groups, representing a difference in pain experienced between groups, but there was no significant difference in codeine intake among the four groups (Table 2).


Figure 156
View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 1. (a) Pain intensity measured by 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) over the first 4 h postoperatively for lidocaine and bupivacaine local anesthetics administered with either placebo or rofecoxib 50 mg. (b) Sum of the pain intensity scores over the first 4 h postoperatively, where the sum of the VAS approximates the AUC. Data are presented as mean ± sem; n = 25–31; *P < 0.01 compared with the other three treatment groups.

 

Figure 256
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 2. Pain intensity measured at 24 (a) and 48 (b) h postoperatively for lidocaine and bupivacaine local anesthetics administered with either placebo or rofecoxib 50 mg. Data are presented as mean ± sem; n = 25–31; *P < 0.05 compared with the other three treatment groups.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2. Rescue Medication Intake

 

PGE2 concentrations collected by microdialysis from the surgical site over the first 4 h postoperatively showed a gradual decrease over the first 90 min followed by increasing levels over the remainder of the observation period for the groups receiving placebo (Fig. 3a), with the bupivacaine/placebo group exhibiting a significant increase in PGE2 over the 4-h observation period (P < 0.05) as shown in Figure 3b. TXB2 concentrations, an indicator of COX-1 activity, were variable over time, but not different between groups during the 4-h observation period (Fig. 4).


Figure 356
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 3. (a) Effects of lidocaine and bupivacaine local anesthetics administered with either placebo or rofecoxib 50 mg on immunoreactive prostaglandin E2 (ir PGE2) from inflammatory transudate collected by means of surgically implanted microdialysis probes after extraction of third molar teeth. (b) Area under the ir PGE2 time concentration curve over the first 4 h after surgery. Data are presented as mean ± sem; n = 10–13; *P < 0.01 compared with the other three treatment groups.

 

Figure 456
View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 4. (a) Effects of lidocaine and bupivacaine local anesthetics administered with either placebo or rofecoxib 50 mg on levels of immunoreactive thromboxane B2 (ir TXB2) in inflammatory transudate. (b) Area under the ir TXB2 time concentration curve over the first 4 h after surgery. Data are presented as mean ± sem; n = 5–9.

 

Changes in gene expression of COX1/COX2 after bupivacaine treatment are shown in (Fig. 5). Compared with presurgical levels, at 48 h COX-1 gene expression was increased twofold (2.15 ± 0.44, P < 0.05, paired t-test) as was COX-2 (3.21 ± 0.79, P < 0.05). Bupivacaine induced a significant increase in COX-2 gene expression compared with presurgical tissue levels and to that of the lidocaine group (P < 0.05, Student’s t-test).


Figure 556
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Figure 5. Effects of lidocaine and bupivacaine on the gene expression of cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2 as measured by quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction after third molar tooth extraction. Data are expressed as mean ± sem, n = 12–18. *P < 0.05 compared with presurgery tissues (paired t-test), **P < 0.05 (unpaired t-test).

 

DISCUSSION

Bupivacaine up-regulated COX-2 gene expression and increased PGE2 production at the surgical site, accompanied by higher pain intensity at time points after the effects of the LA dissipated (24 and 48 h). This effect was ameliorated by rofecoxib for both LAs at later time points. The higher pain intensity in the bupivacaine group compared with the lidocaine group at 24 and 48 h contrasts with the results of our previous studies evaluating preemptive analgesic strategies,13,16 where administration of bupivacaine in the perioperative period resulted in less pain at 48 h that was attributed to suppression of postoperative nociceptive input. However, both previous studies were performed under general anesthesia using propofol and nitrous oxide. Many studies indicate that nitrous oxide inhibits excitatory N-methyl-d-aspartate glutamate transmission.24,25N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors are intimately involved in the development and maintenance of central sensitization.26,27 It is also suggested that a significant portion of the hypnotic action of propofol is mediated by enhancing the {gamma}-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-induced chloride current through binding to the β-subunit of the GABAA receptor. Suppression of central inhibitory mechanisms mediated via GABAA receptors is also involved in central sensitization.28 Therefore, in the presence of nitrous oxide and propofol, the development of central sensitization would be greatly impaired, and this may have contributed to the results obtained in those studies. In addition, spinal propofol is reported to decrease PGE2 concentrations in the CSF of rats undergoing surgery or sham operation.12 The suppression of central inflammatory responses by general anesthesia, as described earlier8 is an explanation for failure of thoracoabdominal surgery to increase CSF levels of interleukin-1β, tumor necrosis factor-{alpha}, or interleukin-6 in humans.29

The actions of LAs on inflammation are complex and reflect interplay of mechanisms at many levels. Although LAs block the conduction of nociceptive input, the induction of cytokines is not necessarily inhibited. For example, bupivacaine and tetrodotoxin did not diminish cytokine induction in carrageenan-induced hindpaw inflammation in rats,30 and sciatic nerve blockade in animals with hindpaw inflammation did not prevent increases in central COX-2 or PGE2 levels as effectively as administration of a cytokine inhibitor.9 Intraplantar infiltration with lidocaine and bupivacaine before carageenan transiently limited signs of inflammatory pain, but did not prevent it.31 Similarly, procaine failed to inhibit PGE2 release in mice spinal cord after formalin injection (Hamza M, unpublished observations). In agreement with the findings of the present study, Kroin et al.12 found an increase in pain behavior and secretion of PGE2 in the CSF of rats in response to spinal bupivacaine that was reduced by oral coadministration of rofecoxib. The 50-mg dose of rofecoxib has been shown (along with other coxibs) to rapidly penetrate the CNS as measured by CSF levels in healthy volunteers32,33 and to be 15% the level of plasma concentrations at the same dose.33 Hence, coxibs may act, in part, at the level of the human CNS.

Local tissue irritation resulting in an inflammatory infiltrate, and consequently pain, during or after anesthesia has been observed for some LAs.34–36 Histological studies indicate that bupivacaine produces the most and lidocaine the least inflammation in rat subcutaneous tissue.37 Pain at the injection site is also reportedly higher for bupivacaine. Morris et al.38 compared pain of injection from five different LAs and found that bupivacaine induced more pain than lidocaine. Hence, local tissue irritation resulting in cytokine release might explain the higher pain intensity we observed in the bupivacaine only group at 24 and 48 h.

It is important to note that the pH of the bupivacaine solution administered in the present study was lower (3.7) than that of lidocaine solution (4.2) and may have caused direct irritation at the site of administration. Buffering of LAs reduces the pain of injection and may attenuate tissue irritation.39 In the present study, it was not possible to include an unanesthetized control group. Thus, it is not clear if the lower PGE2 production and COX-2 expression in the lidocaine group was a proinflammatory effect for bupivacaine or an antiinflammatory effect of lidocaine. Intrathecal lidocaine has been reported to inhibit spinal prostaglandin production,40 and to inhibit the synthesis of leukotriene B4, PGE1, PGE2, and TXB2 when applied topically in combination with prilocaine for burn injury in the rat.41 In contrast, bupivacaine reportedly upregulates CSF PGE2 after spinal anesthesia.12 Lidocaine is an inhibitor of phospholipase A2 (PLA2) activity,42,43 which is a rate-limiting enzyme for the release of arachidonic acid from membrane phospholipids in response to inflammation.9 Therefore, inhibiting PLA2 may have contributed to lower PGE2 production in the lidocaine-treated group. An interesting finding in the present study is the up-regulation of COX-1 expression at 48 h, although TXB2 did not differ in the immediate postoperative period. In mice with collagen-induced arthritis, COX-1 expression was increased in both inflamed skin and spinal cord.44 COX-1 is also suggested to play an important role in spinal cord pain processing and sensitization in postoperative pain,45,46 and specific COX-1 inhibitors may be useful to treat postoperative pain.45 Furthermore, it was reported that COX-1 immunoreactivity is increased in the spinal cord after nerve injury.47

In the present study, the combination of rofecoxib with bupivacaine suppressed the onset and intensity of postoperative pain in the immediate postoperative period. Bupivacaine alone elicited more pain at later time points, significantly more at 24 h which was ameliorated by rofecoxib. Thus, the addition of rofecoxib offset the proinflammatory effect from bupivacaine at later time points. Rofecoxib was used in this study as a selective inhibitor of COX-2. Although rofecoxib is no longer on the market, based on the literature it is likely that COX-2 inhibition through other COX-2 inhibitors, or through dual-COX-1/2 activity would result in similar effects.

In summary, the results of the present study suggest that in the absence of general anesthesia, bupivacaine injected locally induces a proinflammatory effect, manifesting as up-regulation of COX-2 expression and PGE2 production, and increased pain intensity after the cessation of the anesthetic effect. These findings may have relevance to the clinical practice of using the long-acting LA bupivacaine to suppress the development of sensitization if our results are validated by further clinical studies.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Drs. George Grimes and Judy Starling of the NIH Pharmaceutical Development Service for contribution to the testing and blinding of the investigational agents used.

Footnotes

Accepted for publication September 10, 2007.

Supported by the Division of Intramural Research, NIH.

REFERENCES

  1. Woolf CJ, Salter MW. Plasticity and pain: role of the dorsal horn. In: McMahon SB, Koltzenburg M, eds. Wall and Melzack’s textbook of pain. 5th ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, 2005:91–105
  2. Woolf CJ, Chong MS. Preemptive analgesia–treating postoperative pain by preventing the establishment of central sensitization. Anesth Analg 1993;77:362–79[Web of Science][Medline]
  3. Watkins LR, Maier SF, Goehler LE. Immune activation: the role of pro-inflammatory cytokines in inflammation, illness responses and pathological pain states. Pain 1995;63:289–302[Web of Science][Medline]
  4. Funk CD. Prostaglandins and leukotrienes: advances in eicosanoid biology. Science 2001;294:1871–5[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Gordon SM, Brahim JS, Rowan J, Kent A, Dionne RA. Peripheral prostanoid levels and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug analgesia: replicate clinical trials in a tissue injury model. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2002;72:175–83[Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Dionne RA, Gordon SM, Rowan J, Kent A, Brahim JS. Dexamethasone suppresses peripheral prostanoid levels without analgesia in a clinical model of acute inflammation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61:997–1003[Web of Science][Medline]
  7. Khan AA, Brahim JS, Rowan JS, Dionne RA. In vivo selectivity of a selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor in the oral surgery model. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2002;72:44–9[Web of Science][Medline]
  8. Buvanendran A, Kroin JS, Berger RA, Hallab NJ, Saha C, Negrescu C, Moric M, Caicedo MS, Tuman KJ. Upregulation of prostaglandin E2 and interleukins in the central nervous system and peripheral tissue during and after surgery in humans. Anesthesiology 2006;104:403–10[Web of Science][Medline]
  9. Samad TA, Moore KA, Sapirstein A, Billet S, Allchorne A, Poole S, Bonventre JV, Woolf CJ. Interleukin-1beta-mediated induction of Cox-2 in the CNS contributes to inflammatory pain hypersensitivity. Nature 2001;410:471–5[Medline]
  10. Lee YS, Kim H, Wu TX, Wang XM, Dionne RA. Genetically mediated interindividual variation in analgesic responses to cyclooxygenase inhibitory drugs. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2006;79:407–18[Web of Science][Medline]
  11. Beiche F, Scheuerer S, Brune K, Geisslinger G, Goppelt-Struebe M. Up-regulation of cyclooxygenase-2 mRNA in the rat spinal cord following peripheral inflammation. FEBS Lett 1996;390:165–9[Web of Science][Medline]
  12. Kroin JS, Buvanendran A, Watts DE, Saha C, Tuman KJ. Upregulation of cerebrospinal fluid and peripheral prostaglandin E2 in a rat postoperative pain model. Anesth Analg 2006;103:334–43[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Gordon SM, Dionne RA, Brahim J, Jabir F, Dubner R. Blockade of peripheral neuronal barrage reduces postoperative pain. Pain 1997;70:209–15[Web of Science][Medline]
  14. Capdevila X, Barthelet Y, Biboulet P, Ryckwaert Y, Rubenovitch J, d’Athis F. Effects of perioperative analgesic technique on the surgical outcome and duration of rehabilitation after major knee surgery. Anesthesiology 1999;91:8–15[Web of Science][Medline]
  15. Rodgers A, Walker N, Schug S, McKee A, Kehlet H, van Zundert A, Sage D, Futter M, Saville G, Clark T, MacMahon S. Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials. BMJ 2000;321:1493[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Gordon SM, Brahim JS, Dubner R, McCullagh LM, Sang C, Dionne RA. Attenuation of pain in a randomized trial by suppression of peripheral nociceptive activity in the immediate postoperative period. Anesth Analg 2002;95:1351–7[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Sisk AL, Dionne RA, Wirdzek PR. Evaluation of etidocaine hydrochloride for local anesthesia and postoperative pain control in oral surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1984;42:84–8[Web of Science][Medline]
  18. Bouloux GF, Punnia-Moorthy A. Bupivacaine versus lidocaine for third molar surgery: a double-blind, randomized, crossover study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999;57:510–14; discussion 5[Web of Science]
  19. Dionne RA, Wirdzek PR, Fox PC, Dubner R. Suppression of postoperative pain by the combination of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, flurbiprofen, and a long-acting local anesthetic, etidocaine. J Am Dent Assoc 1984;108:598–601[Abstract]
  20. Cassuto J, Sinclair R, Bonderovic M. Anti-inflammatory properties of local anesthetics and their present and potential clinical implications. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2006;50:265–82[Web of Science][Medline]
  21. Gentili ME, Mazoit JX, Samii KK, Fletcher D. The effect of a sciatic nerve block on the development of inflammation in carrageenan injected rats. Anesth Analg 1999;89:979–84[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Beloeil H, Asehnoune K, Moine P, Benhamou D, Mazoit JX. Bupivacaine’s action on the carrageenan-induced inflammatory response in mice: cytokine production by leukocytes after ex-vivo stimulation. Anesth Analg 2005;100:1081–6[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Pham-Marcou TA, Gentili M, Asehnoune K, Fletcher D, Mazoit JX. Effect of neurolytic nerve block on systemic carrageenan-induced inflammatory response in mice. Br J Anaesth 2005;95:243–6[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Jevtovic-Todorovic V, Todorovic SM, Mennerick S, Powell S, Dikranian K, Benshoff N, Zorumski CF, Olney JW. Nitrous oxide (laughing gas) is an NMDA antagonist, neuroprotectant and neurotoxin. Nat Med 1998;4:460–3[Web of Science][Medline]
  25. Koblin DD. Mechanisms of action. In: Miller RD, ed. Miller’s anesthesia. 6th ed. New York: Elsevier/Churchill Livingstone, 2005:105–29
  26. Woolf CJ, Costigan M. Transcriptional and posttranslational plasticity and the generation of inflammatory pain. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1999;96:7723–30[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Caudle RM, Perez FM, Del Valle-Pinero AY, Iadarola MJ. Spinal cord NR1 serine phosphorylation and NR2B subunit suppression following peripheral inflammation. Mol Pain 2005;1:25[Medline]
  28. Sivilotti L, Woolf CJ. The contribution of GABAA and glycine receptors to central sensitization: disinhibition and touch-evoked allodynia in the spinal cord. J Neurophysiol 1994;72:169–79[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Kunihara T, Sasaki S, Shiiya N, Miyatake T, Mafune N, Yasuda K. Proinflammatory cytokines in cerebrospinal fluid in repair of thoracoabdominal aorta. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;71:801–6[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Beloeil H, Ji RR, Berde CB. Effects of bupivacaine and tetrodotoxin on carrageenan-induced hind paw inflammation in rats (Part 2): cytokines and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinases in dorsal root ganglia and spinal cord. Anesthesiology 2006;105:139–45[Web of Science][Medline]
  31. Buritova J, Fletcher D, Honore P, Besson JM. Effects of local anaesthetics on carrageenan-evoked inflammatory nociceptive processing in the rat. Br J Anaesth 1996;77:645–52[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Dembo G, Park SB, Kharasch ED. Central nervous system concentrations of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in humans. Anesthesiology 2005;102:409–15[Web of Science][Medline]
  33. Buvanendran A, Kroin JS, Tuman KJ, Lubenow TR, Elmofty D, Luk P. Cerebrospinal fluid and plasma pharmacokinetics of the cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor rofecoxib in humans: single and multiple oral drug administration. Anes Analg 2005;100:1320–4
  34. Kramp LF, Eleazer PD, Scheetz JP. Evaluation of prilocaine for the reduction of pain associated with transmucosal anesthetic administration. Anesth Prog 1999;46:52–5[Medline]
  35. Lustig JP, Zusman SP. Immediate complications of local anesthetic administered to 1,007 consecutive patients. J Am Dent Assoc 1999;130:496–9[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Jorkjend L, Skoglund LA. Infiltrated lidocaine 2% with epinephrine 1:80,000 causes more postoperative pain than lidocaine 2% after oral soft tissue surgery. Anesth Prog 1999;46:71–6[Medline]
  37. Ribeiro PD Jr, Sanches MG, Okamoto T. Comparative analysis of tissue reactions to anesthetic solutions: histological analysis in subcutaneous tissue of rats. Anesth Prog 2003;50:169–80[Medline]
  38. Morris R, McKay W, Mushlin P. Comparison of pain associated with intradermal and subcutaneous infiltration with various local anesthetic solutions. Anesth Analg 1987;66:1180–2[Free Full Text]
  39. Davies RJ. Buffering the pain of local anaesthetics: a systematic review. Emerg Med (Fremantle) 2003;15:81–8
  40. Ma W, Du W, Eisenach JC. Intrathecal lidocaine reverses tactile allodynia caused by nerve injuries and potentiates the antiallodynic effect of the COX inhibitor ketorolac. Anesthesiology 2003;98:203–8[Web of Science][Medline]
  41. Yregard L, Cassuto J, Tarnow P, Nilsson U. Influence of local anaesthetics on inflammatory activity postburn. Burns 2003;29:335–41[Web of Science][Medline]
  42. Vadas P, Stefanski E, Pruzanski W. Potential therapeutic efficacy of inhibitors of human phospholipase A2 in septic shock. Agents Actions 1986;19:194–202[Web of Science][Medline]
  43. Kunze H, Nahas N, Traynor JR, Wurl M. Effects of local anaesthetics on phospholipases. Biochim Biophys Acta 1976; 441:93–102[Medline]
  44. Dou W, Jiao Y, Goorha S, Raghow R, Ballou LR. Nociception and the differential expression of cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1), the COX-1 variant retaining intron-1 (COX-1v), and COX-2 in mouse dorsal root ganglia (DRG). Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat 2004;74:29–43[Web of Science][Medline]
  45. Zhu X, Conklin D, Eisenach JC. Cyclooxygenase-1 in the spinal cord plays an important role in postoperative pain. Pain 2003;104:15–23[Web of Science][Medline]
  46. Prochazkova M, Dolezal T, Sliva J, Krsiak M. Different patterns of spinal cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 mRNA expression in inflammatory and postoperative pain. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2006;99:173–7[Web of Science][Medline]
  47. Zhu X, Eisenach JC. Cyclooxygenase-1 in the spinal cord is altered after peripheral nerve injury. Anesthesiology 2003; 99:1175–9[Web of Science][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
H. Beloeil, M. Gentili, D. Benhamou, and J.-X. Mazoit
The Effect of a Peripheral Block on Inflammation-Induced Prostaglandin E2 and Cyclooxygenase Expression in Rats
Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2009; 109(3): 943 - 950.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gordon, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Dionne, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gordon, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Dionne, R. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Pain Mechanisms
Right arrow Regional Anesthesia
Right arrow Pain
Right arrow Pharmacology

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2008 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press