4.2 Article

Inhibitory effects of S-(-) and R-(+) bupivacaine on neutrophil function

期刊

ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
卷 45, 期 5, 页码 570-575

出版社

MUNKSGAARD INT PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2001.045005570.x

关键词

complement receptors; neutrophils; bupivacaine; oxidative burst; phagocytosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Local anesthetics inhibit migration, enzyme release and superoxide anion generation of polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMN). Due to their ability to phagocytose and kill bacteria PMN represent a major defense mechanism in the circulating blood. In this study we determined the influence of racemic bupivacaine and its enantiomers on neutrophil phagocytic activity, oxidative burst as well as surface expression of complement and Fc gamma receptors. Methods: Venous blood was pre-incubated with different concentrations of either racemic bupivacaine, R-(+) or S-(-) bupivacaine. Fluoresceine isothiocyanate (FITC)-labeled antibodies against Fc gamma receptor m (CD16), complement receptor 1 (CD35) and complement receptor 3 (CD11b) were used to determine surface receptor expression. Phagocytic activity was measured by ingestion of FITC-labeled vital Staphylococcus aureus. Oxidative burst was determined by conversion of nonfluorescent dihydrorhodamine 123 into fluorescent rhodamine 123. Fluorescent intensity of each sample was determined by flow cytometry. Results: Racemic bupivacaine inhibited surface receptor expression, phagocytosis, and oxidative burst in a time- and concentration-dependent manner. Although the S-(-) enantiomer exerted significantly less inhibitory action on neutrophil function compared to R-(+) and racemic bupivacaine, these effects were small compared to the overall changes. Conclusion: These findings suggest that bupivacaine impairs surface receptor expression and may thereby contribute to reduced phagocytic activity and oxidative burst. Enantiomer-specific effects of bupivacaine may play a minor role in the inhibition of these leukocyte functions.

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

4.2
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