Subject(s)
Animals , Humans , Mice , Death, Sudden, Cardiac/etiology , Domperidone/adverse effects , Dopamine Antagonists/adverse effects , Parkinson Disease/complications , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Dopamine Antagonists/administration & dosage , Models, Animal , Parkinson Disease/mortalityABSTRACT
Several reports have shown that prolactin (PRL) plays a role in prostatic growth, but few studies considered the role of PRL in the process of prostatic inflammation. Young (45 ± 5 days old) and adult (75 ± 5 days old) male Wistar rats were subcutaneously injected daily with domperidone (4.0 mg.kg-1) to maintain high serum PRL levels. The animals were treated for 15, 30, 45 or 60 days. Blood and prostate samples were collected at the end of each treatment for PRL dosage and histological analysis, respectively. Only young animals treated with DOMP for 15 and 30 days displayed inflammatory infiltrate in the prostate. These results confirm literature data in regards to PRL involvement in inducing prostate inflammation. Moreover, it was concluded that young animals are more susceptible then adults to the PRL action concerning prostate inflammation...
A prolactina (PRL) influencia o crescimento prostático, entretanto poucos estudos investigaram o papel da PRL na inflamação prostática. Ratos Wistar jovens (45 ± 5 dias de idade) e adultos (75 ± 5 dias de idade) receberam injeções subcutâneas diárias de domperidona (4,0 mg.kg-1) para manter níveis séricos altos de PRL. Os animais foram tratados por 15, 30, 45 ou 60 dias. Amostras de sangue e próstata foram coletadas ao final dos tratamentos para dosagem de PRL e análise histológica, respectivamente. Apenas os animais jovens tratados com domperidona por 15 e 30 dias apresentaram infiltrado inflamatório na próstata. Esses resultados confirmaram a participação da PRL na indução da inflamação prostática. A conclusão obtida foi que animais jovens são mais susceptíveis à ação da PRL na inflamação da próstata que os adultos...
Subject(s)
Animals , Rats , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Prolactin/administration & dosage , Prostate/physiopathology , Inflammation/diagnosis , Inflammation/veterinaryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Prokinetic drugs are widely used for treatment of non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD). AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of a new prokinetic agent, itopride hydrochloride in patients of NUD and compare it with domperidone. METHODS: Fifty-six patients who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in the study. Patients underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy to rule out organic pathology as a cause for their symptoms. The patient's symptoms were graded on a 4-point scale (0 to 3) at the beginning of treatment and at the end of Week-one and Week-two Patients were randomly allocated to receive either one tablet of itopride hydrochloride 50mg three times daily or one tablet of domperidone 10mg three times daily for two weeks. Pre-treatment and post-treatment hemogram, liver function and renal function tests, prolactin level and ECG were done in all patients. The response to therapy was evaluated by assessing the relief of symptoms at the end of two weeks on a 5-point scale. Statistical analysis was done using two-tailed paired t-test; Wilcoxon matched pairs ranks sum test, Mann-Whitney-U test and chi-square test as applicable. RESULTS: Of the fifty-five patients enrolled in the study (age range of 18-60 yrs, median age of 35yrs), 26 were males and twenty nine were females. They had a median duration of symptoms for 4 weeks. Twenty-seven patients received itopride and 28 received domperidone. One patient did not follow up in the domperidone group, thus 54 patients were evaluable for analysis. Moderate to complete symptomatic relief was observed in 22 (81%) patients in the itopride group and 19 patients (70%) in the domperidone group (p > 0.05, NS). Both the drugs were well tolerated and neither caused prolongation of QT interval nor any abnormality in any serum biochemistry values. CONCLUSION: Therapy with itopride resulted in good symptomatic relief, was safe, well tolerated and comparable in efficacy to domperidone in relieving the symptoms of NUD. By virtue of its efficacy and tolerability, it could be an ideal choice for providing symptomatic relief to patients suffering from non-ulcer dyspepsia.
Subject(s)
Administration, Oral , Adolescent , Adult , Benzamides/administration & dosage , Benzyl Compounds/administration & dosage , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Administration Schedule , Dyspepsia/diagnosis , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Gastroscopy/methods , Humans , India , Male , Middle Aged , Reference Values , Severity of Illness Index , Single-Blind Method , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
As flutuaçöes motoras (FM) decorrentes do uso prolongado de levedopa säo uma das principais complicaçöes do tratamento da doença de Parkinson (DP). A utilizaçäo da apomorfina, um potente agonista de receptores dopaminérgicos, associada ao domperidone para bloquear seus efeitos eméticos, surge como uma alternativa para contornar as FM dos parkinsonianos. Para adquirirmos experiência inicial com essa droga, decidimos estudar a açäo e os efeitos adversos da apomorfina em um grupo de quatro pacientes do nosso ambulatório com o diagnóstico de DP e com flutuaçöes do rendimento da levodopa. A apomorfina foi administrada por via subcutânea, sendo obtido o estado "on" em todos os pacientes com doses entre 1,5 e 3mg por aplicaçäo. A latência para o início do efeito variou de 7 a 30 minutos e a duraçäo da açäo de 60 a 85 minutos. O estado "on" produzido com a apomorfina foi indistinguível do observado com a levodopa, inclusive com a ocorrência de discinesias. Näo foram observados efeitos colaterais significativos. Nossa experiência inicial mostra que a apomorfina, em doses relativamente baixa, é uma alternativa eficaz para as FM da DP, com poucos efeitos colaterais
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Apomorphine/therapeutic use , Parkinson Disease/drug therapy , Apomorphine/administration & dosage , Apomorphine/adverse effects , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Domperidone/therapeutic use , Drug Therapy, Combination , Levodopa/adverse effectsSubject(s)
Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Adult , Pregnancy Complications/surgery , Pulmonary Edema/complications , Tocolysis/adverse effects , Anesthesia, Spinal , Betamethasone/administration & dosage , Ceftriaxone/administration & dosage , Cesarean Section/methods , Cholestasis/complications , Cyanosis/etiology , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Fenoterol/adverse effects , Furosemide/administration & dosage , Lidocaine/administration & dosage , Metronidazole/administration & dosage , Narcotics/administration & dosage , Polygeline/administration & dosage , Pregnancy, Multiple , Tachycardia/etiology , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methodsABSTRACT
We determined the effect of 13 days of treatment with 2.0 mg/kg haloperidol, 30.0 mg/kg metoclopramide or 4.0 mg/kg domperidone on the number of tumor cells of mice bearing Ehrlich ascites carcinoma. The three dopaminergic blockers significantly reduced the number of tumor cells of experimental mice. The mean ñ SEM number of tumor cvells x 10******6/ml saline lavage was 25.5 ñ 5.9 for the haloperidol group, 36.8 ñ 4.7 for the metoclopramide group, 25.3 ñ 3.5 for the domperidone group and 54.0 ñ 9.0 for the control mice (treated with 0.9% NaCl). In a second experiment, treatment with 0.5 and 2.0 mg/kg haloperidol showed that the antitumor effect of this drug was dose dependent. The possible mechanisms underlying these results (such as an increase in prolactin levels or a direct action of these drugs on lymphocytes) are discussed in light of the specific pharmacological properties of each dopaminergic blocker
Subject(s)
Animals , Mice , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/pharmacology , Carcinoma, Ehrlich Tumor/drug therapy , Analysis of Variance , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Screening Assays, Antitumor , Haloperidol/administration & dosageABSTRACT
Se revisan las bases anatómicas, bioquímicas y neurofisiológicas del aparato digestivo. Asimismo, se analiza la farmacología de las principales drogas con acción procinética a nivel del tracto gastrointestinal, sus indicaciones, efectos secundarios y dosis en pediatría.
Subject(s)
Humans , Infant , Child, Preschool , Child , Bethanechol Compounds , Bethanechol Compounds/administration & dosage , Bethanechol Compounds/analysis , Digestive System/anatomy & histology , Digestive System/innervation , Domperidone , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Domperidone/analysis , Gastrointestinal Motility/drug effects , Metoclopramide , Metoclopramide/administration & dosage , Metoclopramide/analysis , Pharmacokinetics , Intestines/physiologyABSTRACT
The effects of chronic administration of domperidone (DOM), a peripherally acting anti-emetic and hyperprolactinemic D2-dopaminoceptor antagonisti, on active and inhibitory conditioned behavior were tested on male and female rats. DOM (4 mg/Kg) was injected ip daily either for 5 or 30 days. Although treatment for 5 days failed to effect experimental parameters, treatment for 30 days impaired the performance of active conditioned avoidance of female, but not male, rats. This effect was no longer observed 7 days after ending treatment. No effects of DOM treatment were observed on active conditioned avoidance of male rats or on inhibitory conditioned behavior of all rats. These data suggest that female rats are more susceptible to the hyperprolactinemic effects of DOM than male rats. However, an influence of estrous cycle interruption cannot be rejected
Subject(s)
Rats , Animals , Male , Female , Avoidance Learning/drug effects , Conditioning, Psychological , Domperidone/pharmacology , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Rats, Wistar , Sex FactorsSubject(s)
Humans , Vomiting/chemically induced , Nausea/chemically induced , Antiemetics/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Phenothiazines/administration & dosage , Phenothiazines/pharmacology , Vomiting/physiopathology , Vomiting/drug therapy , Benzodiazepines/administration & dosage , Benzodiazepines/pharmacology , Butyrophenones/administration & dosage , Butyrophenones/pharmacology , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/administration & dosage , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/pharmacology , Domperidone/administration & dosage , Domperidone/pharmacology , Metoclopramide/administration & dosage , Metoclopramide/pharmacology , Nausea/drug therapy , Antiemetics/administration & dosageABSTRACT
El presente, estudio fue llevado a cabo con la finalidad de investigar el efecto de la administración repetida del antagonista dopaminérgico domperidone (DOM) sobre la secreción de prolactina, así como la respuestas de esta hormona a la administración de la hormona liberadora de tirotrofina (TRH) durante el efecto máximo del antagonista. Se estudiaron 9 mujeres normales durante la fase folicular del ciclo menstrual, las cuales fueron divididas en 3 grupos de acuerdo al siguiente diseño: I. Administración repetida de DOM (10 mg cada 60 minutos por 3 horas), seguida de un bolo i.v. de TRH (200 ug). II. Bolos intermitentes de DOM (10 mg cada 60 minutos por 2 horas), seguidos de TRH, 200 ug. i.v. al tiempo de la tercera inyección del DOM, y III. Bolos intermitentes de DOM (10 mg/hora por 3 horas), seguidas de 10 mg i.v. de metoclopramida al momento de la última dosis de DOM, así como de 200 g de TRH administrados 90 minutos después del bolo de DOM + metoclopramida. Las concentraciones plasmáticas de PRL inmunorreactiva fueron cuantificados antes y a intervalos de 15 a 30 minutos durante los experimentos. Treinta minutos después del primer bolo de DOM, todos los sujetos mostraron un incremento significativo en las concentraciones séricas de prolactina (PRL); posteriormente, dichas concentraciones disminuyeron progresivamente a pesar de bolos adicionales del antagonista. Igualmente, la administración de metoclopramida al tiempo de la refractariedad hipofisiaria al DOM, fue incapaz de incrementar las concentraciones séricas de PRL. Todos los sujetos respondieron a TRH sin importar el momento de la inyección, las concentraciones séricas de PRL presentes o las manipulaciones farmacológicas precedentes (administración de DOM y/o metoclopramida). La cinética de liberación de PRL durante estas manipulaciones farmacológicas pudieran ser explicadas por el efecto agonista-antagonista del DOM sobre la secreción del lactotropo. Más aún, la presencia de una respuesta a significativa a TRH durante períodos de refractariedad al DOM, sugiere la existencia de 2 pozas de PRL en el lactotropo humano, una de ellas regulada por dopamina en tanto que la segunda por un factor liberador de PRL y/o por TRH