4.7 Article

Hydrogen sulfide-induced mechanical hyperalgesia and allodynia require activation of both Cav3.2 and TRPA1 channels in mice

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 166, 期 5, 页码 1738-1743

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2012.01886.x

关键词

transient receptor potential ankyrin-1 (TRPA1); Cav3; 2; T-type calcium channel; hydrogen sulfide; pain; hyperalgesia; allodynia

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  2. 'Antiaging Center Project' for Private Universities from Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Hydrogen sulfide, a gasotransmitter, facilitates somatic pain signals via activation of Cav3.2 T-type calcium channels in rats. Given evidence for the activation of transient receptor potential ankyrin-1 (TRPA1) channels by H2S, we asked whether TRPA1 channels, in addition to Cav3.2 channels, contribute to the H2S-induced mechanical hyperalgesia and allodynia in mice. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH Mechanical hyperalgesia and allodynia were evaluated by the von Frey test in mice. Cav3.2 or TRPA1 channels in the sensory neurons were silenced by repeated intrathecal administration of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides in mice. KEY RESULTS Intraplantar administration of NaHS evoked hyperalgesia and allodynia in mice, an effect attenuated or abolished by NNC 550396 or mibefradil, T-type calcium channel blockers, and by ascorbic acid or zinc chloride, known to selectively inhibit Cav3.2 channels, out of the three isoforms of T-type calcium channels. Silencing of Cav3.2 channels in the sensory neurons also prevented the NaHS-induced hyperalgesia and allodynia in mice. The NaHS-induced hyperalgesia and allodynia in mice were significantly suppressed by AP18, a TRPA1 channel blocker, and by silencing of TRPA1 channels in the sensory neurons. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Mechanical hyperalgesia and allodynia induced by NaHS/H2S required activation of both Cav3.2 and TRPA1 channels 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

4.7
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