4.5 Article

Inhibition of pain behavior by GABAB receptors in the thalamic ventrobasal complex:: Effect on normal rats subjected to the formalin test of nociception

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1115, 期 -, 页码 37-47

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.07.089

关键词

GABA(B); baclofen; CGP35348; thalamus; acute pain; tonic pain; antinociception; formalin test

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ventrobasal complex of the thalamus (VB) participates in the transmission and modulation of noxious information. Recent data suggested that GABA(B) receptors in the VB might be involved in the modulation of neuronal activity in response to chronic noxious input. However, in acute inflammatory pain, the role of GABA(B) receptors in the VB remains unknown. The formalin test of nociception was performed in rats stereotaxically injected in the VB contralateral to the formalin-injected paw, with saline (controls), baclofen (0.5 and 0.875 mu g), a specific GABA(B) receptor agonist or CGP35348 (25 mu g), a GABA(B) receptor antagonist. Control animals exhibited phase 1 (acute pain) and phase 2 (tonic pain) nociception-related activities as previously described. The higher dose of baclofen induced a significant decrease of all pain-related behaviors in both phases of the test and had no observable effects on the animals' motor function, while the lower dose could not reduce the total pain-related activities. Injection of CGP35348 prior to baclofen reduced the antinociceptive effect caused by baclofen during phase 2 in the paw-jerks and in total pain-related activities. CGP35348 alone had antinociceptive effects in both phases, though less pronounced than baclofen 0.875 mu g in the total pain-related activities during phase 2. Data demonstrate that both the blockade and the activation of GABA(B) receptors in the VB of rats induce antinociception in acute and tonic pain. An important role for GABAB receptors on the thalamic processing of nociceptive input in the VB is suggested. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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