Effects of triprolidine and dipipanone in the cold induced pain test, and the central nervous system of healthy volunteers

Spinal sensory and motor blockade by intrathecal doxylamine and triprolidine in rats

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this experiment was mainly to examine the effects of intrathecally injected doxylamine and triprolidine, two antihistamine drugs spinal motor and sensory functions.

METHODS

After intrathecally injecting the rats with five different doses, the dose-response curves of spinal sensory and motor block with doxylamine and triprolidine were constructed. In comparison with the local anaesthetic mepivacaine, the quality and duration of spinal anaesthesia with doxylamine or triprolidine were conducted.

KEY FINDINGS

Doxylamine, mepivacaine and triprolidine elicited spinal motor and sensory (nociception and proprioception) blockades in a dose-dependent fashion. On the ED₅₀ (50% effective dose) basis, the rank order of drug potency was triprolidine > mepivacaine > doxylamine (P < 0.05) at provoking spinal motor, proprioceptive and nociceptive blockades. On the equianaesthetic doses (ED₂₅ , ED₅₀ and ED₇₅ ), the duration of spinal anaesthesia with doxylamine was longer (P < 0.01) than that with mepivacaine or triprolidine. Moreover, doxylamine or triprolidine displayed greater potency (ED₅₀ ) (P < 0.05) and duration (P < 0.05) of sensory block over motor block.

CONCLUSIONS

Doxylamine or triprolidine produces a dose-dependent effect of spinal motor and sensory block. Triprolidine with a better nociception-selective action over motor block has a better potency than mepivacaine or doxylamine. Doxylamine and triprolidine produce longer durations than mepivacaine.

Cognitive domains affected by histamine H(1)-antagonism in humans: a literature review

The neurotransmitter histamine has been suggested to be involved in cognitive functioning. Generally, studies in animals have shown a decrease in performance after decreasing histamine neurotransmission and improved performance after increasing histamine neurotransmission. It is unclear, however, what role histamine plays in cognition in humans. Up until now, most data are derived from studies and reviews that aimed to assess the sedative potential of H(1)-antagonists and not the effects on cognition in particular. The objective of this paper is specifically to review which cognitive domains are affected by H(1)-antagonists. Taken together, 90 experimental studies on the performance effects of sedative H(1)-antagonists published between 1973 and 2009 were reviewed. Results showed that psychomotor skills and attention are most frequently impaired and memory the least. Tasks assessing memory that were affected usually required rapid responses. It was concluded that both the complexity of the task as well as the demand for information processing speed determines the sensitivity to the effects of central H(1)-antagonism. The importance of the sensitive cognitive domains to histaminergic dysfunction, as well as the relation between histamine related decrease in arousal and task performance deserve further research.

Clinical neuropharmacology of drugs of abuse: a comparison of drug-discrimination and subject-report measures

Advances in molecular pharmacology and behavioral science have helped elucidate the structure and function of the central nervous system and its relationship to behavior and has sparked the development of pharmacological agents that have increasingly selective and potent effects with fewer adverse side effects. The sensitivity and predictive validity of the two most commonly used methodologies for assessing the neuropharmacological effects of centrally active drugs, subject report of drug effects and drug discrimination, were examined. The sensitivity of the measures was comparable across stimulant, sedative, and opioid drugs. Results with drug-discrimination methodologies were generally consistent with hypothesized neuropharmacological mechanisms across all drug classes, whereas subject reports conformed under more limited testing conditions. Firm conclusions regarding the relative utility of drug-discrimination and subject-report measures for clinical studies of neuropharmacological mechanisms are limited by the small number of studies in which the two methodologies have been tested using identical pharmacological pretreatment manipulations.

Roles of histamine receptors in pain perception: A study using receptors gene knockout mice

To study the participation of histamine H1- and H2-receptors in pain perception, H1 and H2 receptor knockout (KO) mice were examined for pain threshold by means of three kinds of nociceptive tasks. These included assays for thermal, mechanical, and chemical nociception. H1KO mice showed significantly fewer nociceptive responses to the hot-plate, tail-flick, tail-pressure, paw-withdrawal, formalin, capsaicin, and abdominal constriction tests. Sensitivity to noxious stimuli in H1KO mice was significantly decreased when compared to wild-type mice. The antinociceptive phenotypes of H2KO were relatively less prominent when compared to H1KO mice. We also examined the antinociceptive effects of intrathecally-, intracerebroventricularly-, and subcutaneously-administered morphine in H1KO and H2KO mice. In these nociceptive assays, the antinociceptive effects produced by morphine were more enhanced in both H1KO and H2KO mice. The effects of histamine H1- and H2-receptor antagonists on morphine-induced antinociception were studied in ICR mice. The intrathecal, intracerebroventricular and subcutaneous co-administrations of d-chlorpheniramine enhanced the effects of morphine in all nociceptive assays examined. In addition, intrathecal co-administrations of cimetidine enhanced the antinociception of morphine in the hot plate tests. These results suggest that existing H1 and H2 receptors play an inhibitory role in morphine-induced antinociception in the spinal and supra-spinal levels.

Antihistamines as analgesics

Histamine activates pain-transmitting nerve fibres, releases pain-related neuropeptides, and is painful when injected into the skin. Histamine agonists mimic these effects, suggesting that histamine plays a role in mediating the signal transduction of tissue damage or other painful stimulus. Certain 'antihistamines' (histamine H1 receptor antagonists) and other antihistaminics are 'analgesic' in preclinical or clinical models. Potential sites of action of these agents include the brain and spinal cord and a specific histamine receptor subtype might be involved (three subtypes have been identified). However, it is possible that other mechanisms account for the analgesic effect.