Levetiracetam Reduces Anesthetic-Induced Hyperalgesia in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As part of an increase in excitability, small doses of pentobarbital, propofol, and midazolam induce an increased sensitivity to pain. Specific therapy to prevent or reduce this excitability may offer advantages over current clinical management with analgesics and sedatives. The pharmacological profile of the novel antiepileptic drug, levetiracetam, suggests that it may reduce the intensity of the excitatory stages of anesthesia. METHODS: We examined the influence of levetiracetam on the reduction of the nociceptive reflex threshold in rats by sedative doses of pentobarbital, propofol, and midazolam. Measurements of nociceptive reflex threshold to pressure and heat were made and then repeated after intraperitoneal injection of saline or one of three doses of levetiracetam (100, 200, 500 mg/kg). Pentobarbital (30 mg/kg), propofol (30 mg/kg), or midazolam (1.9 mg/kg) were then administered. The reflex threshold was measured every 10 min, starting at 5 min after the sedative injection, until 65 min had elapsed. RESULTS: Levetiracetam did not alter nociceptive reflex threshold in nonsedated animals (P = 0.11) or influence the degree or duration of sedation. The three anesthetic/sedative drugs reduced the nociceptive reflex threshold by 20%-30% of control values. Levetiracetam reduced the hyperreflexia associated with pentobarbital and midazolam (P < 0.05), but not propofol. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support further investigation into the role of levetiracetam in the prevention of anesthetic-induced excitability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".