4.1 Article

Evaluation of an improved sustained-release buprenorphine formulation for use in mice

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY RESEARCH
卷 75, 期 7, 页码 619-625

出版社

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.75.7.619

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DA013583]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-To evaluate analgesic effects of an improved sustained-release buprenorphine (BUP-SR) formulation administered to mice. Animals-36 male Swiss-Webster mice. Procedures-Mice were assigned to each of 3 treatment groups (n = 12 mice/group). Treatments were administered SC (vehicle [control treatment], 1.5 mg of buprenorphine hydrochloride [BUP-HCl]/kg, and 1.5 mg of BUP-SR/kg). Mice were evaluated (total activity, gastrointestinal tract motility, respiratory rate, cataleptic behavior, and tail-flick and hot plate nociception tests) to determine behavioral and physiologic responses at 4, 24, and 48 hours after treatment administration. Body weight and respiratory rate were measured before and at each time point after treatment administration. Results-SC administration of BUP-SR resulted in significant antinociception effects for 48 hours for the hot plate and tail-flick nociception tests without substantial adverse effects. Gastrointestinal tract motility and total activity were higher at 4 hours for mice receiving BUP-SR than for mice receiving the vehicle, but values were the same between these groups at 24 and 48 hours. The BUP-SR group had a lower respiratory rate than did the control group at all times after treatment administration. Mice treated with BUP-SR had no significant changes in body weight during the study, whereas mice treated with BUP-HCl had a significant decrease in body weight at 24 and 48 hours. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-BUP-SR administration resulted in antinociception effects for 48 hours. Results of this study indicated that the improved BUP-SR formulation could be safely administered SC and conferred superior analgesia, compared with that for BUP-HCl, in mice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据