RESUMO
BACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence suggests that neuroinflammation, which is characterized by infiltration of immune cells, activation of mast cells and glial cells, and production of inflammatory mediators in the peripheral and central nervous systems, plays an important role in the induction and maintenance of chronic pain. Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA), which is a type of N-acylethanolamide and a lipid, has an anti-inflammatory effect. Relative to the anti-inflammatory effect, little is known about its analgesic effect in chronic pain. This study aimed to determine whether PEA relieves chronic inflammatory and neuropathic pain. METHODS: Male Sprague-Dawley rats were injured by transection of the left L5 and L6 spinal nerves to induce neuropathic pain or were injected with monoiodoacetic acid into the synovial cavity of knee joints to induce inflammatory pain. To assess the degree of pain, two kinds of stimuli - pressing von Frey filaments and wetting with acetone - were applied to the plantar surface of the rat to measure mechanical and cold sensitivity, respectively. Pain was measured by assessing behavioral responses, including paw withdrawal response threshold and paw withdrawal frequency upon stimulation. RESULTS: Neuropathic pain caused by spinal nerve transection (SNT) decreased the mechanical threshold and increased the frequency of response to acetone application. But, cold allodynia caused by SNT did not decrease the withdrawal frequency. Mechanical hyperalgesia caused by chronic inflammation was significantly reduced by both intraperitoneal and intra-articular injections of PEA. CONCLUSIONS: These outcomes revealed that PEA might be effective in relieving inflammatory and neuropathic pain, especially pain induced by mechanical hyperalgesia, but not cold allodynia.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: In this study, we compared the propofol-ketamine and propofol-remifentanil combinations for deep sedation and analgesia during pediatric burn wound dressing changes. METHODS: Fifty pediatric patients aged 12-36 months, undergoing burn wound dressing changes, were randomly assigned to receive propofol-remifentanil (group PR) or propofol-ketamine (group PK) for deep sedation and analgesia. Patients in the group PR received 2 mg·kg(-1) propofol and 0.1 µg·kg(-1) remifentanil, and 0.05 µg·kg(-1) ·min(-1) remifentanil was infused continuously until the end of the procedure. Patients in the group PK received 2 mg·kg(-1) propofol and 1 mg·kg(-1) ketamine, and the same volume of isotonic saline was infused continuously until the end of the procedure. Additional propofol with remifentanil or ketamine was administered when required. Hemodynamic variables, drug requirements, occurrence of patient movement, surgeon's satisfaction score, recovery time, and the incidence of adverse events were recorded throughout the procedure and recovery. RESULTS: Recovery time was significantly shorter in the group PR compared to that in the group PK (10.3 [9.1-11.5] min vs 22.5 [20.3-25.6] min, median [interquartile range], respectively; P < 0.001). No significant hypotension or bradycardia occurred throughout the procedure. No significant differences were observed in terms of drug requirements, occurrence of patient movement, surgeon's satisfaction, incidence of respiratory depression, hypoxia, or nausea and vomiting CONCLUSIONS: The combinations of propofol-ketamine and propofol-remifentanil were effective for sedation and analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing burn dressing changes, but the propofol-remifentanil combination provided faster recovery compared to the propofol-ketamine combination.