An electronic pressure-meter nociception paw test for rats

• Published in: Brazilian journal of medical and biological research 2004-03, Vol.37 (3), p.391-399
• Main Authors: Vivancos, G G, Verri, Jr, W A, Cunha, T M, Schivo, I R S, Parada, C A, Cunha, F Q, Ferreira, S H
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis of Variance; Animals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal - pharmacology; BIOLOGY; Carrageenan - pharmacology; Constant pressure test; Dinoprostone - pharmacology; Dipyrone; Dipyrone - pharmacology; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Interactions; Hyperalgesia; Indomethacin; Indomethacin - pharmacology; Male; MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL; Nociception; Pain Measurement - instrumentation; Pain Measurement - methods; Pressure; Rats; Rats, Wistar; Reaction Time; Sensitivity and Specificity; von Frey filaments
• ISSN: 0100-879X; 1414-431X; 0100-879X; 1414-431X
• DOI: 10.1590/S0100-879X2004000300017

The objective of the present investigation was to compare the sensitivity of an electronic nociceptive mechanical paw test with classical mechanical tests to quantify the intensity variation of inflammatory nociception. The electronic pressure-meter test consists of inducing the hindpaw flexion reflex by poking the plantar region with a polypropylene pipette tip adapted to a hand-held force transducer. This method was compared with the classical von Frey filaments test and with the rat paw constant pressure test, a modification of the Randall and Selitto test developed by our group. When comparing the three methods, the electronic pressure-meter and the rat paw constant pressure test, but not the von Frey filaments test, detected time vs treatment interactions in prostaglandin E2 (PGE2)-induced hypernociception. Both methods also detected the PGE2-induced hypernociception in dose- (50-400 ng/paw) and time- (1-4 h) dependent manners, and time vs treatment interactions induced by carrageenin (25-400 microg/paw). Furthermore, the electronic pressure-meter test was more sensitive at early times, whereas the constant pressure test was more sensitive at later times. Moreover, the electronic pressure-meter test detected the dose-dependent antinociceptive effect of local indomethacin (30-300 microg/paw) and dipyrone (80-320 microg/paw) on carrageenin- (200 microg/paw) and PGE2- (100 ng/paw) induced hypernociception, respectively, and also detected the ineffectiveness of indomethacin (300 microg) on the effect of PGE2. Our results show that the electronic pressure-meter provides a sensitive, objective and quantitative mechanical nociceptive test that could be useful to characterize new nociceptive inflammatory mediators and also to evaluate new peripheral analgesic substances.