Intraganglionic injection of a nitric oxide donator induces afferent mechanical sensitization that is attenuated by palmitoylethanolamide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim The aim of this article is to investigate whether the nitric oxide (NO) donator diethylenetriamine/nitric oxide (DETA/NO) affects trigeminal sensory processing through the trigeminal ganglion in part by activating trigeminal satellite glial cells (SGCs) and whether this effect is attenuated by the anti-inflammatory compound palmitoylethanolamide (PEA). Methods DETA/NO was administered to isolated rat trigeminal SGCs in vitro, and injected into the rat trigeminal ganglion in vivo, in the presence or absence of PEA. Results Administration of DETA/NO (1000 µM) increased the release of prostaglandin E 2 by SGCs. PEA (1 and 10 µM) significantly attenuated prostaglandin E 2 release. Two intraganglionic injections of DETA/NO (10 mM, 3 µl) or prostaglandin E 2 at a 30-minute interval did not evoke discharge in trigeminal ganglion neurons that innervate the rat jaw-closer muscles, but did reduce the mechanical activation threshold of their peripheral endings by 30%–50%. Intravenous administration of PEA (1 mg/kg) or ketorolac (0.5 mg/kg) prevented DETA/NO-induced afferent mechanical sensitization. Conclusions Elevation of NO in the trigeminal ganglion results in the sensitization of the peripheral endings of masticatory muscle nociceptors to mechanical stimulation through a mechanism that involves prostaglandin E 2 release from SGCs. Attenuation of this sensitization by PEA suggests a possible option for acute management of craniofacial pain and headache.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".