Voltage-gated sodium channels and visceral pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In conclusion the TTX-resistant sodium current, especially that produced by the NaV1.8 subunit, appears to be a strong candidate for a molecular substrate underlying sensitization of visceral afferent nociceptive neurons. The visceral anti-nociceptive effects of agents that block sodium currents confirm an important role for these channels in visceral sensation. Intravenous lidocaine, a use-dependent sodium channel blocker, is effective in inhibiting both pseudoaffective reflex responses and spinal neuronal discharges to noxious distension of the colon [32]. Likewise, the sodium channel blockers mexiletine and carbamazepine dose-dependently inhibit the responses of nociceptive colonic afferent fibres to colorectal distension [33]. There have been very few clinical reports of the effects of sodium channel blockers on visceral pain [32, 34] although one report describes that systemic local anaesthetics were effective in relieving pain from the spleen [35]. However, indirect evidence comes from the observation that tricyclic antidepressant drugs like amitriptyline are regularly prescribed for functional visceral pain. Although these compounds likely exert their antidepressant effects by blocking the re-uptake of monoamines, many are also potent sodium channel blockers, and this feature may contribute to their effectiveness in some visceral pain patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.007 |
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".