RESUMO
Eugenol has been employed for decades as a condiment, an antimycotic, an antibacterial, an antiviral, and an antioxidant, and it is one of the natural analgesics most frequently utilized for pain and inflammation. Our objective was to determine the analgesic/anti-inflammatory effect of eugenol compared with diclofenac, naproxen, and tramadol using the formalin test. The formalin method was used in 6- to 10-week-old Wistar rats (weighing 250 g each) divided into six groups: saline (0.9%); formalin (5%); diclofenac (250 µg/kg); naproxen (400 µg/kg); tramadol (500 µg/kg), and eugenol (1,400 µg/kg), in the intraplantar part of the hind-end trunk of the rats, with n = 5 per group. Eugenol diminished 44.4% of nociceptive behavior in phase 1 and 48% in phase 2 (p ≤0.05 vs formalin). Eugenol was shown to be 1.14 times more effective than diclofenac, but 1.62 and 1.75 times less effective than naproxen and tramadol, respectively, in phase 1 and 1.45 times less effective than diclofenac and naproxen and 1.66 less effective than tramadol in phase 2 (p ≤0.05). These data suggest that eugenol possesses moderate activity in the acute pain phase and greater activity in inflammatory-type pain, and both effects are comparable to those produced by diclofenac and are less than the effects produced by naproxen and tramadol in the formalin test
Assuntos
Animais , Masculino , Ratos , Eugenol/efeitos adversos , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/análise , Diclofenaco/efeitos adversos , Tramadol/efeitos adversos , Medição da Dor/métodos , Naproxeno/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) are among the most commonly used drugs in clinical practice. They block cyclooxygenases (COX) enzymes, but the degree of inhibition of COX-1 and COX-2 varies between them. In general, NSAIDs are classified in selective COX-2 or coxibs and non-selective or traditional NSAIDs. Both the analgesic and antiinflammatory effects, as well as the cardiovascular adverse effects, depend on the COX-2 inhibition. This paper reviews the available evidence of the increased risk of thrombotic events for both coxibs and traditional NSAID. The prothrombotic effect could be due to the inhibition of endothelial COX-2, with a decrease in production of prostacyclin and a relative increase in platelet thromboxane levels. Coxibs and diclofenac 150 mg/day seem to increase the risk of major vascular events by more than a third. Ibuprofen 2400 mg/day could slightly increase the risk of coronary events. Naproxen 1000 mg/day apparently does not increase the risk of vascular events. Besides ibuprofen and naproxen have the potential to decrease the cardioprotective effect of low doses of aspirin. Naproxen (= 1000 mg/day) and low doses of ibuprofen (= 1200 mg/day) are considered to have the most favorable thrombotic cardiovascular safety profiles of all NSAIDs. Therapeutic decisions should be based on an assessment of a person's individual risk factors, using the safest NSAIDs, at the lowest effective doses, for the shortest duration necessary to control symptoms, restricting their use in patients with increased cardiovascular risk.
Assuntos
Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/induzido quimicamente , Aspirina/efeitos adversos , Celecoxib/efeitos adversos , Interações Medicamentosas , Humanos , Ibuprofeno/efeitos adversos , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Los antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINEs) se encuentran entre los fármacos más utilizados en la práctica clínica. Actúan mediante el bloqueo de las enzimas ciclooxigenasas (COX), pero el grado de inhibición de COX-1 y COX-2 varía entre ellos. Se ha generalizado la clasificación entre COX-2 selectivos o coxibs, y los no selectivos o AINEs tradicionales. Tanto los efectos analgésico y antiinflamatorio como los efectos adversos cardiovasculares dependen de la inhibición de COX-2. Este trabajo revisa las evidencias disponibles del aumento del riesgo de eventos trombóticos tanto para los coxibs como para los AINEs tradicionales. El efecto protrombótico podría deberse a la inhibición de la COX-2 endotelial, con disminución de la prostaciclina y un incremento relativo de los niveles del tromboxano plaquetario. Los coxibs y el diclofenac, 150 mg/día, aumentarían el riesgo de eventos vasculares mayores en más de un tercio. El ibuprofeno 2400 mg/día aumentaría levemente el riesgo de eventos coronarios. El naproxeno 1000 mg/día no incrementaría el riesgo de eventos vasculares. Además, el ibuprofeno y el naproxeno tienen el potencial del disminuir el efecto cardioprotector de bajas dosis de aspirina. El naproxeno (≤ 1000 mg/día) y el ibuprofeno a bajas dosis (≤ 1200 mg/día) deberían considerarse los AINEs con el mejor perfil de seguridad cardiovascular. Las decisiones terapéuticas deben basarse en una adecuada evaluación del riesgo del paciente, utilizando los AINEs más seguros, a las menores dosis efectivas, por el menor tiempo posible que permita el control de los síntomas, restringiendo su utilización en enfermos con aumento del riesgo cardiovascular.
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) are among the most commonly used drugs in clinical practice. They block cyclooxygenases (COX) enzymes, but the degree of inhibition of COX-1 and COX-2 varies between them. In general, NSAIDs are classified in selective COX-2 or coxibs and non-selective or traditional NSAIDs. Both the analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, as well as the cardiovascular adverse effects, depend on the COX-2 inhibition. This paper reviews the available evidence of the increased risk of thrombotic events for both coxibs and traditional NSAID. The prothrombotic effect could be due to the inhibition of endothelial COX-2, with a decrease in production of prostacyclin and a relative increase in platelet thromboxane levels. Coxibs and diclofenac 150 mg/day seem to increase the risk of major vascular events by more than a third. Ibuprofen 2400 mg/day could slightly increase the risk of coronary events. Naproxen 1000 mg/day apparently does not increase the risk of vascular events. Besides ibuprofen and naproxen have the potential to decrease the cardioprotective effect of low doses of aspirin. Naproxen (≤ 1000 mg/day) and low doses of ibuprofen (≤ 1200 mg/day) are considered to have the most favorable thrombotic cardiovascular safety profiles of all NSAIDs. Therapeutic decisions should be based on an assessment of a person´s individual risk factors, using the safest NSAIDs, at the lowest effective doses, for the shortest duration necessary to control symptoms, restricting their use in patients with increased cardiovascular risk.
Assuntos
Humanos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/induzido quimicamente , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Aspirina/efeitos adversos , Ibuprofeno/efeitos adversos , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , Interações Medicamentosas , Celecoxib/efeitos adversosRESUMO
The aim of the present study was to determine whether tizanidine, an alpha2-adrenoceptor agonist, is able to increase the anti-inflammatory and anti-nociceptive effects of naproxen and ketorolac with a low incidence of gastric injury and spontaneous activity in rats. The anti-inflammatory effect was assayed in a carrageenan test, and oral administration of tizanidine (ED40 =0.94±0.2mg/kg), naproxen (ED40=3.18±0.4mg/kg), and ketorolac (ED40=16.4±1.9mg/kg) showed a dose-dependent effect on inflammation. The anti-nociceptive effect was assayed in the formalin test, and administration of tizanidine (ED40=0.39±0.06mg/kg, p.o.), naproxen (ED40=33.9±3.9mg/kg, p.o.) or ketorolac (ED40=6.49±1mg/kg, p.o.) each showed a dose-dependent anti-nociceptive effect. The effects of combinations of tizanidine/naproxen and tizanidine/ketorolac were determined considering their ED40 at a rate of 1:1. Additionally, the tizanidine/naproxen and tizanidine/ketorolac combinations showed anti-inflammatory and anti-nociceptive effects. The tizanidine/ketorolac combination was more potent than tizanidine/naproxen, in both inflammatory (interaction index=0.03 tizanidine/ketorolac and 0.07 tizanidine/naproxen) and nociceptive (interaction index=0.005 tizanidine/ketorolac and 0.01 tizanidine/naproxen) processes. In both cases, tizanidine improved naproxen and ketorolac gastrointestinal tolerability by 50%. Furthermore, co-administration of tizanidine with naproxen or ketorolac did not modify the spontaneous activity in the same way as individual tizanidine administration. Considering that tizanidine increases the anti-inflammatory and anti-nociceptive effects of naproxen or ketorolac, with an increase in gastric tolerability, tizanidine could provide therapeutic advantages in the clinical treatment of inflammation and pain.
Assuntos
Clonidina/análogos & derivados , Cetorolaco/efeitos adversos , Cetorolaco/farmacologia , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Naproxeno/farmacologia , Analgésicos/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos/farmacologia , Animais , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/farmacologia , Clonidina/farmacologia , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Sinergismo Farmacológico , Masculino , Ratos , Ratos Wistar , Estômago/efeitos dos fármacosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Dysmenorrhea is caused by the discharge of prostaglandins into the uterine tissue; therefore, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the established initial therapy for dysmenorrhea. Dysmenorrhea therapy may include the administration of drug monotherapy or combination therapy. However, clinical scientific evidence on the efficacy of medications with two or three drugs combined is scarce or nonexistent. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of two oral fixed-dose combinations for the relief of the symptoms of primary dysmenorrhea among Mexican women. One of the combinations is widely used in Mexico (paracetamol, pyrilamine and pamabrom) and the selected comparison was a medication with naproxen sodium, paracetamol and pamabrom based on the pathophysiology of primary dysmenorrhea. METHODS: This was a single-centre, double blind, experimental, parallel group, randomized trial. Female patients with primary dysmenorrhea, older than 17 years and with pain intensity greater than 45 mm on a visual analogue scale, were included. The patients were then randomized to receive tablets with naproxen sodium, paracetamol and pamabrom or tablets with paracetamol, pyrilamine and pamabrom for one menstrual cycle. Patient evaluations of symptomatology and pain intensity were recorded throughout one menstrual period. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were utilized. RESULTS: An intention-to-treat population of 91 women, with a mean age of 21.3 ± 3.2 years, received paracetamol, pyrilamine and pamabrom tablets, and 98 participants, with a mean age of 21.0 ± 3.2 years, received naproxen sodium, paracetamol and pamabrom tablets. The participants assessments of pain on the Visual Analogue Scale during the menstrual cycle demonstrated a significant reduction in both treatment groups (p<0.05). There is no significant difference in efficacy between both groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that both drug combinations were not different in reducing dysmenorrheic pain. Likewise, both treatments were well tolerated. Therefore, both treatments may be used for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea.
INTRODUCCIÓN: La dismenorrea primaria es causada por la descarga de las prostaglandinas en el tejido uterino. Por lo tanto, los fármacos antiinflamatorios no esteroideos son la terapia inicial para la dismenorrea. El tratamiento para la dismenorrea puede incluir la administración de monoterapia o la combinación de fármacos. Sin embargo, la evidencia clínica científica sobre la eficacia de los medicamentos con dos o tres fármacos combinados es escasa o ausente. OBJETIVO: Evaluar y comparar la eficacia y seguridad de dos combinaciones, en dosis fija y oral para el alivio de los síntomas de la dismenorrea primaria en mujeres mexicanas. Basados en la fisiopatología de la dismenorrea primaria, se utilizó una combinación comercializada en México de paracetamol, pirilamina y pamabrom. El comparador seleccionado fue un medicamento que contiene naproxeno sódico, paracetamol y pamabrom. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un estudio en un solo centro, a doble ciego, experimental, paralelo y aleatorizado. Las pacientes con dismenorrea primaria que se incluyeron fueron mayores de 17 años de edad y con una intensidad del dolor mayor a 45 milímetros en una escala visual analógica. Las pacientes fueron aleatorizadas para recibir tabletas con naproxeno sódico, paracetamol y pamabrom o tabletas con paracetamol, pirilamina y pamabrom para un ciclo menstrual. Se evaluó la intensidad de la sintomatología y el dolor de las pacientes a lo largo de un período menstrual. Se utilizó análisis estadístico descriptivo e inferencial. RESULTADOS: Se incluyó una población con intención de tratar de 91 mujeres, con una edad media de 21,3 ± 3,2 años la cual recibió tabletas de paracetamol, pirilamina y pamabrom. Otras 98 participantes, con una edad media de 21,0 ± 3,2 años, recibieron tabletas de naproxeno sódico, paracetamol y pamabrom. Las evaluaciones de dolor de las participantes con la escala visual analógica durante el ciclo menstrual demostraron una reducción significativa en ambos grupos de tratamiento (p<0,05). No hubo diferencia significativa en la eficacia entre los dos grupos (p>0,05). CONCLUSIONES: Los resultados mostraron que ambas combinaciones de fármacos no fueron diferentes en reducir el dolor dismenorreico. Del mismo modo, ambos tratamientos fueron bien tolerados. Por lo tanto, ambos tratamientos se pueden utilizar para el tratamiento de la dismenorrea primaria.
Assuntos
Acetaminofen/administração & dosagem , Dismenorreia/tratamento farmacológico , Naproxeno/administração & dosagem , Propanolaminas/administração & dosagem , Pirilamina/administração & dosagem , Teofilina/análogos & derivados , Acetaminofen/efeitos adversos , Adolescente , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/efeitos adversos , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/administração & dosagem , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Dismenorreia/fisiopatologia , Feminino , Humanos , México , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Medição da Dor , Propanolaminas/efeitos adversos , Pirilamina/efeitos adversos , Comprimidos , Teofilina/administração & dosagem , Teofilina/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Rebamipide is a gastroprotective agent with promising results against gastric damage induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The present study evaluated if rebamipide protects against naproxen-induced gastric damage in healthy volunteers. Changes in gastric PGE2 tissue concentration were also evaluated. METHODS: After a preliminary endoscopy to rule out previous gastric macroscopic damage, twenty-four healthy volunteers of both sexes were divided into 2 groups. One group received sodium naproxen 550 mg b.i.d. plus placebo for 7 days, while the other group received sodium naproxen 550 mg b.i.d. plus rebamipide 100 mg b.i.d. At the end of treatment, a new endoscopy was performed. Gastric macroscopic damage was evaluated by the Cryer score and by the modified Lanza score. The primary outcome measure of the trial was the macroscopic damage observed in each treatment group at the end of treatment. Biopsies were collected at both endoscopies for PGE2 quantification and histopathological analysis (secondary outcomes). Tissue PGE2 was quantified by ELISA. The randomization sequence was generated using 3 blocks of 8 subjects each. Volunteers and endoscopists were blind to whether they were receiving rebamipide or placebo. RESULTS: All recruited volunteers completed the trial. Sodium naproxen induced gastric damage in both groups. At the end of the study, median Cryer score was 4 in both groups (Difference = 0; 95%CI = -1 to 0; p = 0.728). In the placebo group, the mean tissue PGE2 concentration was 1005 ± 129 pg/mL before treatment and 241 ± 41 pg/mL after treatment (p < 0.001). In the rebamipide group, the mean tissue PGE2 concentration was 999 ± 109 pg/mL before treatment, and 168 ± 13 pg/mL after treatment (p < 0.001). There was no difference in mean tissue PGE2 between the two groups (difference = 5; 95%CI from -334.870 to 345.650; p = 0.975). No significant change was observed at the histopathological evaluation, despite the evident macroscopic damage induced by naproxen. CONCLUSION: Rebamipide does not protect against naproxen-induced gastric damage in healthy volunteers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02632812 . Registered 14 December 2015.
Assuntos
Alanina/análogos & derivados , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Gastrointestinais/uso terapêutico , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Quinolonas/uso terapêutico , Gastropatias/induzido quimicamente , Gastropatias/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Alanina/uso terapêutico , Dinoprostona/análise , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Mucosa Gástrica/patologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gastropatias/patologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used to control arthroscopic pain. Addition of oral effective opioid "codeine" to NSAIDs may be more effective and decrease parenteral opioid consumption in the postoperative period. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of naproxen sodium and a new preparation naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate when administered preemptively for arthroscopic meniscectomy. METHODS: Sixty-one patients were randomized into two groups to receive either oral naproxen sodium (Group N) or naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate (Group NC) before surgery. The surgery was carried out under general anesthesia. Intravenous meperidine was initiated by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for all patients. The primary outcome measure was pain score at the first postoperative hour assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Sedation assessed by Ramsey Sedation Scale, first demand time of PCA, postoperative meperidine consumption, side effects and hemodynamic data were also recorded. RESULTS: The groups were demographically comparable. Median VAS scores both at rest and on movement were significantly lower in Group NC compared with Group N, except 18th hour on movement (p < 0.05). The median time to the first demand of PCA was shorter in Group N compared with Group NC (p < 0.001). Meperidine consumption was higher in Group N compared with Group NC (p < 0.001). There was no difference between groups with respect to side effects (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate provided more effective analgesia than naproxen sodium and did not increase side effects.
RESUMO JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Os anti-inflamatórios não esteroides (AINEs) são frequentemente usados para controlar a dor após artroscopia. A adição de um opiáceo oral eficaz (codeína) aos AINEs pode ser mais efetiva e diminuir o consumo de opiáceo parenteral no pós-operatório. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a eficácia e os efeitos colaterais de naproxeno sódico e uma nova preparação, naproxeno sódico-fosfato de codeína, quando administrados preventivamente para meniscectomia artroscópica. MÉTODOS: Foram randomicamente divididos em dois grupos 61 pacientes para receber naproxeno sódico por via oral (Grupo N) ou naproxeno sódico-fosfato de codeína (Grupo NC) antes da cirurgia. A cirurgia foi feita sob anestesia geral. Meperidina intravenosa foi iniciada por meio de analgesia controlada pelo paciente (ACP) para todos os pacientes. O desfecho primário foi o escore de dor na primeira hora de pós-operatório, avaliada com a escala visual snalógica (EVA). A sedação foi avaliada com a escala de sedação de Ramsey. A primeira demanda de ACP, o consumo de meperidina no pós-operatório, os efeitos colaterais e os dados hemodinâmicos também foram registrados. RESULTADOS: Os grupos foram demograficamente comparáveis. As medianas dos escores EVA tanto em repouso quanto em movimento foram significativamente menores no Grupo NC comparado com o Grupo N; exceto para movimento na avaliação de 18 horas (p < 0,05). A mediana do tempo até a primeira demanda de ACP foi menor no Grupo N em comparação com o Grupo NC (p < 0,001). O consumo de meperidina foi maior no Grupo N em comparação com o Grupo NC (p < 0,001). Não houve diferença entre os grupos em relação aos efeitos colaterais (p > 0,05). CONCLUSÕES: A combinação de naproxeno sódico-fosfato de codeína forneceu analgesia mais efetiva que naproxeno sódico, sem aumentar os efeitos colaterais.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Artroscopia/métodos , Naproxeno/administração & dosagem , Codeína/administração & dosagem , Menisco/cirurgia , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Medição da Dor , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/administração & dosagem , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Estudos Prospectivos , Seguimentos , Analgesia Controlada pelo Paciente/métodos , Codeína/efeitos adversos , Combinação de Medicamentos , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Meperidina/administração & dosagem , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used to control arthroscopic pain. Addition of oral effective opioid "codeine" to NSAIDs may be more effective and decrease parenteral opioid consumption in the postoperative period. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of naproxen sodium and a new preparation naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate when administered preemptively for arthroscopic meniscectomy. METHODS: Sixty-one patients were randomized into two groups to receive either oral naproxen sodium (Group N) or naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate (Group NC) before surgery. The surgery was carried out under general anesthesia. Intravenous meperidine was initiated by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for all patients. The primary outcome measure was pain score at the first postoperative hour assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Sedation assessed by Ramsey Sedation Scale, first demand time of PCA, postoperative meperidine consumption, side effects and hemodynamic data were also recorded. RESULTS: The groups were demographically comparable. Median VAS scores both at rest and on movement were significantly lower in Group NC compared with Group N, except 18(th) hour on movement (p<0.05). The median time to the first demand of PCA was shorter in Group N compared with Group NC (p<0.001). Meperidine consumption was higher in Group N compared with Group NC (p<0.001). There was no difference between groups with respect to side effects (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of naproxen sodium-codeine phosphate provided more effective analgesia than naproxen sodium and did not increase side effects.
Assuntos
Artroscopia/métodos , Codeína/administração & dosagem , Menisco/cirurgia , Naproxeno/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Analgesia Controlada pelo Paciente/métodos , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/administração & dosagem , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Codeína/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Meperidina/administração & dosagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Medição da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
Long-term use nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug is associated with gastrointestinal (GI) lesion formation. The aim of this study was to investigate the protective activity of cashew gum (CG), a complex heteropolysaccharide extracted from Anacardium occidentale on naproxen (NAP)-induced GI damage. Male Wistar rats were pretreated with vehicle or CG (1, 3, 10, and 30 mg/kg, p.o.) twice daily for 2 days; after 1 h, NAP (80 mg/kg, p.o.) was administered. The rats were euthanized on the 2nd day of treatment, 4 h after NAP administration. Stomach lesions were measured using digital calipers. The medial small intestine was used for the evaluation of macroscopic lesion scores. Samples of the stomach and the intestine were used for histological evaluation, and assays for glutathione (GSH), malonyldialdehyde (MDA), and myeloperoxidase (MPO). Additional rats were used to measure gastric mucus and secretion. Pretreatment with CG reduced the macroscopic and microscopic damage induced by NAP. CG significantly attenuated NAP-induced alterations in MPO, GSH, and MDA levels. Furthermore, CG returned adherent mucus levels to normal values. These results suggest that CG has a protective effect against GI damage via mechanisms that involve the inhibition of inflammation and increasing the amount of adherent mucus in mucosa.
Assuntos
Anacardium , Gastroenteropatias/induzido quimicamente , Gastroenteropatias/prevenção & controle , Naproxeno/efeitos adversos , Gomas Vegetais/uso terapêutico , Polissacarídeos/uso terapêutico , Animais , Gastroenteropatias/patologia , Masculino , Extratos Vegetais/isolamento & purificação , Extratos Vegetais/uso terapêutico , Gomas Vegetais/isolamento & purificação , Polissacarídeos/isolamento & purificação , Ratos , Ratos WistarRESUMO
Here, we have evaluated the protective effect of the NO donor cis-[Ru(bpy)2(SO3)NO](PF6) (FOR0810) in experimental models of gastric damage induced by naproxen or ethanol in mice, and the involvement of soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) and ATP-sensitive K(+) channels (KATP) in these events. Swiss mice were pre-treated with saline, ODQ (a soluble guanylate cyclase inhibitor; 10 mg kg(-1)) or glibenclamide (a KATP channels blocker; 10 mg kg(-1)). After either 30 min or 1 h, FOR0810 (3 mg kg(-1)) was administered. At the end of 30 min, the animals received naproxen (300 mg kg(-1)) by gavage. After 6 h, the animals were sacrificed and gastric damage, myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity, and TNF-α and IL-1ß gastric concentrations were evaluated. In addition, the effects of FOR0810 on naproxen-induced mesenteric leukocyte adherence were determined by intravital microscopy. Other groups, were pre-treated with saline, ODQ or glibenclamide. After either 30 min or 1 h, FOR0810 was administered. At the end of 30 min, the animals received 50% ethanol by gavage. After 1 h, the animals were sacrificed, and gastric damage, gastric reduced glutathione (GSH) concentration and malondialdehyde (MDA) levels were determined. In naproxen-induced gastric damage, FOR0810 prevented gastric injury, decreased gastric MPO activity and leukocyte adherence, associated with a decrease in TNFα and IL-1ß gastric concentrations. FOR0810 also prevented ethanol-induced gastric damage by increase in GSH levels and decrease in MDA levels. ODQ and glibenclamide completely reversed FOR0810's ability to prevent gastric damage by either naproxen or ethanol. We infer that FOR0810 prevented gastric damage through the activation of both sGC and KATP channels, which triggered a decrease in both free radical and cytokine production via the blocking of neutrophil adhesion and infiltration.