Publicação: The Effects of Subarachnoid Administration of Preservative-Free S(+)-Ketamine on Spinal Cord and Meninges in Dogs
Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Data
2012-02-01
Orientador
Coorientador
Pós-graduação
Curso de graduação
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Tipo
Artigo
Direito de acesso
Acesso restrito
Resumo
BACKGROUND: The N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist ketamine and its active enantiomer, S(+)-ketamine, have been injected in the epidural and subarachnoid spaces to treat acute postoperative pain and relieve neuropathic pain syndrome. In this study we evaluated the effects of a single dose of preservative-free S(+)-ketamine, in doses usually used in clinical practice, in the spinal cord and meninges of dogs.METHODS: Under anesthesia (IV etomidate (2 mg/kg) and fentanyl (0.005 mg/kg), 16 dogs (6 to 15 kg) were randomized to receive a lumbar intrathecal injection (L5/6) of saline solution of 0.9% (control group) or S(+)-ketamine 1 mg/kg(-1) (ketamine group). All doses were administered in a volume of 1 mL over a 10-second interval. Accordingly, injection solution ranged from 0.6% to 1.5%. After 21 days of clinical observation, the animals were killed; spinal cord, cauda equine root, and meninges were removed for histological examination with light microscopy. Tissues were examined for demyelination (Masson trichrome), neuronal death (hematoxylin and eosin) and astrocyte activation (glial fibrillary acidic protein).RESULTS: No clinical or histological alterations of spinal tissue or meninges were found in animals from either control or ketamine groups.CONCLUSION: A single intrathecal injection of preservative-free S(+)-ketamine, at 1 mg/kg-1 dosage, over a concentration range of 6 to 15 mg/mL injected in the subarachnoid space in a single puncture, did not produce histological alterations in this experimental model. (Anesth Analg 2012;114:450-55)
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Idioma
Inglês
Como citar
Anesthesia and Analgesia. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, v. 114, n. 2, p. 450-455, 2012.
