Free
Meeting Abstracts  |   August 2004
Retigabine Stimulates Human KCNQ2/Q3 Channels in the Presence of Bupivacaine
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Mark A. Punke, M.D.
    *
  • Patrick Friederich, M.D.
  • *Resident, Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, †Privatdozent, Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf.
Article Information
Meeting Abstracts   |   August 2004
Retigabine Stimulates Human KCNQ2/Q3 Channels in the Presence of Bupivacaine
Anesthesiology 8 2004, Vol.101, 430-438. doi:
Anesthesiology 8 2004, Vol.101, 430-438. doi:
THE delayed rectifier potassium channels KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 play a major role in controlling the excitability of neuronal cells.1 They are prominently expressed in the central nervous system and in dorsal root ganglia.2,3 Heteromultimeric complexes formed by these channels are the molecular correlate of the M-current.4,5 KCNQ2/Q3 channels may control the subthreshold excitability of a neuron and the number of action potentials fired by a neuron when receiving excitatory input.1,6 Mutations causing functional impairment of these potassium channels result in a human form of epilepsy7–9 consistent with the hypothesis that hyperexcitability of neuronal cells is a typical sign of epileptic disorders.10 KCNQ2/Q3 channels are specifically activated by the anticonvulsant drug retigabine.11,12 Activation of KCNQ2/Q3 channels leads to a hyperpolarization of the neuronal membrane potential13 and to a reduction of the frequency of neuronal action potential firing.14 Retigabine effectively reduces the seizure activity in a wide variety of animal models,15 and the anticonvulsant also reduces seizure frequency in patients with refractory epilepsy.16 
Accidental intravenous injection, overdosage or rapid systemic uptake of local anesthetics may result in severe neurotoxic side effects such as seizures.17 The incidence of seizures associated with regional anesthesia ranges from 0.75–7 of 1000 patients depending on the technique performed and the local anesthetic used.18,19,20 There is only limited information about the molecular mechanisms underlying local anesthetic-induced seizure. Molecular targets suggested to mediate these severe side effects include γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptors,21,22 N-methyl-D-aspartate-receptors,23 and potassium channels.24,25 Treatment usually consists of the application of γ-aminobutyric acid receptor type A-agonists such as benzodiazepines and barbiturates and artificial ventilation is therefore often mandatory.26,27 
Despite the well-established role of KCNQ2/Q3 potassium channels in a human form of epilepsy the action of bupivacaine on these ion channels has not been investigated. It is, therefore, unknown if bupivacaine inhibits KCNQ2/Q3 channels and if inhibition occurs at toxicological relevant concentrations. Furthermore, it is unknown if retigabine in the presence of bupivacaine is still capable of stimulating KCNQ2/Q3 channels. This may be indicative of a novel treatment for local anesthetic-induced seizure. The current study therefore had the following aims. First, it was intended to characterize the effects of bupivacaine on human KCNQ2/Q3 channels. Second, we aimed to investigate if retigabine stimulates KCNQ2/Q3 channels in the presence of neurotoxic concentrations of bupivacaine.
Materials and Methods
Cell Culture
Chinese hamster ovary cells were grown as nonconfluent monolayers in MEM Eagle Alpha medium (Gibco Invitrogen Cooperation, Karlsruhe, Germany) containing 10% fetal calf serum (Biochrom, Berlin, Germany), penicillin (100 IU/ml), streptomycin (100 μg/ml), and l-glutamine (292 μg/ml) (Gibco Invitrogen Cooperation). The cells were cultured at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere (95% air, 5% CO2). Before the electrophysiological experiments the cells were subcultured in monodishes (35 mm diameter, NUNC, Roskilde, Denmark) and transiently transfected at least 24 h before recording with constructs containing cDNA encoding human KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels (GenBank Accession No. AF110020; AF033347) using Lipofectamine (Invitrogen Life Technologies) according to the manufacturers recommendation. For expression of heteromultimers, equal amounts of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 cDNA (1 μg) were used. Cotransfection with a construct for enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP-N1, BD Biosciences Clontech, Heidelberg, Germany) was used to detect positive cells.
Patch-clamp Recordings
Whole cell currents and membrane potentials were measured with the voltage-clamp and current-clamp methods of the patch-clamp technique28 using an EPC-9 amplifier (HEKA Elektronik, Lambrecht, Germany) and Pulse software 8.53 (HEKA Elektronik). The currents were filtered at 1 kHz and series resistance was actively compensated by at least 80%. The patch electrodes were fabricated from borosilicate glass capillary tubes with filament (World Precision Instruments, Saratoga, FL) using a Sutter P-97 puller (Sutter Instrument Company, Novato, CA). The pipettes had a resistance of 2 to 4 MΩ. They were filled with a solution containing the following electrolyte concentrations (mM): KCl, 160; MgCl2, 0.5; HEPES, 10; Na2ATP, 2; pH 7.25 adjusted with KOH. The extracellular solution consisted of (mM): NaCl, 135; KCl, 5; CaCl2, 2; MgCl2, 2; HEPES, 5; sucrose, 10; Phenol red, 0.01 mg/ml; pH 7.4 adjusted with NaOH (all chemicals by Sigma, Deissenhofen, Germany). Bupivacaine (Sigma, Deissenhofen, Germany) was dissolved in the extracellular solution prepared from a stock solution of 1 mm. The stock solutions were stored at −20°C. Retigabine was provided by Viatris GmbH Radebeul, Dresden, Germany. Retigabine (100 mm) was dissolved in dimethylsulfoxide to yield a stock solution. At the highest concentration of retigabine used in these experiments (10 μm) the dimethylsulfoxide concentration did not exceed 0.01%. At this concentration dimethylsulfoxide had no effect on KCNQ2/Q3 current amplitudes (10.5 ± 4.8 nA versus  10.5 ± 4.6 nA, +30 mV, n = 3; P  > 0.05). Test solutions containing the drugs were superperfused on the cells by a perfusion system driven by hydrostatic pressure with Teflon tubing.
Stimulation Protocols and Data Analysis
The holding potential during all experiments was −80 mV. KCNQ2/Q3 whole-cell currents were elicited by different protocols. The current-voltage relationship was established by depolarizing the cell membrane in steps of 10 mV for 1500 ms between the membrane potentials of −70 mV and +30 mV. The whole cell conductance was calculated using the following formula: Gmax= Imax/(Vm− EK), where Imaxis the maximum current at the end of each test potential, Vmis the membrane potential, and EKthe Nernst potential for potassium (−87.54 mV under our experimental conditions). The conductance-voltage relationship was mathematically described by a Boltzmann function (y = M3/(1 + exp ((M1− M0)/M2)), where M0= the membrane potential, M1= the activation midpoint, M2= the slope factor, and M3= the maximal whole cell conductance) using Kaleidagraph software (Synergy Software, Reading, PA). For characterizing the concentration-dependent effect of bupivacaine two different pulse protocols were used: a ramp pulse protocol that increased during 1500 ms from the holding potential to a membrane potential of +60 mV and a rectangular pulse protocol that depolarized the membrane potential from −80 mV to +30 mV for 1200 ms. In the case of the ramp pulse protocol, inhibition of the currents by bupivacaine was measured as the reduction of charge transfer between the membrane potential of −80 mV and +60 mV. For this purpose the ratio of the charge (Q) under local anesthetic influence and the mean of charge under control and washout conditions was subtracted from one (inhibition = 1− (Qdrug/((Qcontrol+ Qwashout)/2)). In the case of the rectangular pulse protocol, the inhibition of the maximum current was quantified as the ratio of the maximum current (I) under local anesthetic influence and the mean of maximum current under control and washout conditions was subtracted from one (inhibition = 1 − (Idrug/((Icontrol+ Iwashout)/2)). The data of the concentration-response curves were mathematically described by Hill equations (y = M1× M0M2/M3M2+ M0M2, where y = inhibition, M0= drug concentration, M1= maximal inhibition, M2= Hill coefficient, and M3= concentration of the half-maximal inhibitory effect or IC50value) using Kaleidagraph software (Synergy Software). Standard errors of calculated Hill parameters were expressed as defined by Kaleidagraph. For describing the pharmacological interaction of bupivacaine and retigabine on KCNQ2/Q3 channels, a ramp pulse protocol was used that increased from the holding potential during 1500 ms to a membrane potential of 0 mV. The effects of retigabine and bupivacaine on the currents were quantified as the reduction or stimulation of charge transfer compared with control values. For the quantification of the small effect of retigabine (300 nm) only experiments with a size of the washout current of at least 97% of the control current were incorporated into the analysis. To analyze the pharmacological effects on the deactivation kinetics of KCNQ2/Q3 channels tail currents were evoked by a prepulse of 1000 ms length to a membrane potential of +30 mV and subsequent test pulses with a duration of 300 ms to membrane potentials increasing from −100 mV to +30 mV in 10-mV steps. The time constants were determined by fitting current decay with a mono-exponential function using Pulsefit software 8.53 (HEKA Elektronik) and a biexponential function in case of currents under the influence of retigabine.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical significance was tested using analysis of variance and Tukey-Kramer multiple comparisons test (Graph Pad Prism, San Diego, CA) or two-sided paired and unpaired Student t  test, as appropriate (Excel; Microsoft, Redmond, WA). Data points are given as mean ± SD unless stated otherwise; n values indicate the number of experiments.
Results
As a prerequisite to the intended pharmacological experiments, basic properties of KCNQ2/Q3 channels expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells were characterized first. The original current recordings demonstrated voltage-gated slowly activating and noninactivating currents (fig. 1A). The maximum current size at +30 mV was 14 ± 7 nA, with a maximum conductance of 116.8 ± 62.5 nS and an activation midpoint of −29.7 ± 2.7 mV (n = 5). The time constants of activation (τact) were voltage-dependent. The values of τactmono-exponentially declined from 908 ± 103 ms at −40 mV to a value of 74 ± 14 ms at +30 mV (n = 5). As illustrated by the example shown (fig. 1A), the anticonvulsant retigabine increased the current amplitude by shifting the activation midpoint of KCNQ2/Q3 channels to a more hyperpolarized potential (fig. 1B). Retigabine 10 μm shifted the voltage-dependence of activation by −21 ± 3 mV (n = 5; P  < 0.01). The conductance-voltage curve indicated that retigabine mainly exerted its effect at membrane potentials between −80 mV and 0 mV (fig. 1B). A ramp protocol to activate KCNQ2/Q3 showed a similar stimulatory effect of retigabine as a rectangular pulse protocol (fig. 1C). Retigabine stimulated the charge transfer in a concentration-dependent and reversible manner. The application of retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, 10 μm) resulted in a significant stimulation of the charge transfer by a factor of 1.07 ± 0.04 (n = 7; P  < 0.05); 1.46 ± 0.12 (n = 8; P  < 0.01) and 2.28 ± 0.43 (n = 8; P  < 0.01).
Fig. 1. (  A  ) Original current traces of human KCNQ2/Q3 channels transiently expressed in CHO cells channels ranging from −80 mV to 0 mV in 10-mV steps measured under control conditions and during the application of retigabine (10 μm). (  B  ) The shift of the activation curve under the influence of retigabine (10 μm), control, and washout. The activation midpoint was shifted by −21 ± 3 mV compared with the mean of control and washout (n = 5;  P  < 0.01). (  C  ) Original current traces elicited with the ramp pulse protocol. The effects of retigabine on KCNQ2/Q3 currents were concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. (  D  ) The effects of retigabine were normalized to control values. The diagram shows the retigabine effects compared to the respective mean of control and washout. Retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, and 10 μm) increased the charge transfer by 1.07 ± 0.04 (n = 7;  P  < 0.05); 1.46 ± 0.12 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01); 2.28 ± 0.43 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01)  .
Fig. 1. (  A  ) Original current traces of human KCNQ2/Q3 channels transiently expressed in CHO cells channels ranging from −80 mV to 0 mV in 10-mV steps measured under control conditions and during the application of retigabine (10 μm). (  B  ) The shift of the activation curve under the influence of retigabine (10 μm), control, and washout. The activation midpoint was shifted by −21 ± 3 mV compared with the mean of control and washout (n = 5;  P  < 0.01). (  C  ) Original current traces elicited with the ramp pulse protocol. The effects of retigabine on KCNQ2/Q3 currents were concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. (  D  ) The effects of retigabine were normalized to control values. The diagram shows the retigabine effects compared to the respective mean of control and washout. Retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, and 10 μm) increased the charge transfer by 1.07 ± 0.04 (n = 7;  P  < 0.05); 1.46 ± 0.12 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01); 2.28 ± 0.43 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01) 
	.
Fig. 1. (  A  ) Original current traces of human KCNQ2/Q3 channels transiently expressed in CHO cells channels ranging from −80 mV to 0 mV in 10-mV steps measured under control conditions and during the application of retigabine (10 μm). (  B  ) The shift of the activation curve under the influence of retigabine (10 μm), control, and washout. The activation midpoint was shifted by −21 ± 3 mV compared with the mean of control and washout (n = 5;  P  < 0.01). (  C  ) Original current traces elicited with the ramp pulse protocol. The effects of retigabine on KCNQ2/Q3 currents were concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. (  D  ) The effects of retigabine were normalized to control values. The diagram shows the retigabine effects compared to the respective mean of control and washout. Retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, and 10 μm) increased the charge transfer by 1.07 ± 0.04 (n = 7;  P  < 0.05); 1.46 ± 0.12 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01); 2.28 ± 0.43 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01)  .
×
Next, we established the concentration-response curve for the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine on KCNQ2/Q3 channels using both an increasing ramp and a rectangular pulse protocol (fig. 2A). Bupivacaine inhibited the channels evoked by either protocol in a concentration-dependent and reversible manner. The concentration-response data for inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels were mathematically described by Hill equations and were fit to the data (fig. 2B). Both stimulation protocols resulted in similar concentration-response curves. In the case of the ramp pulse, the IC50value was 173 ± 7 μm and the Hill coefficient was 1.4 ± 0.1 (mean ± SEM, n = 37). The rectangular pulse yielded an IC50value of 217 ± 9 μm and a Hill coefficient of 1.3 ± 0.1 (mean ± SEM, n = 31). To test for a possible stereoselective effect of the bupivacaine isomers the inhibition of racemic bupivacaine was compared with the inhibition of the S(-) enantiomer levobupivacaine at a concentration close to the IC50value of racemic bupivacaine (200 μm; fig. 2C). This concentration was chosen because a potency difference would best be detected at the steepest part of the concentration-response curve. In case of a stereospecific effect KCNQ2/Q3 channels would be inhibited with different potency by bupivacaine and levobupivacaine. However, this was not the case. Racemic bupivacaine and levobupivacaine inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 42 ± 4% (n = 7) and 42 ± 5% (n = 10, P  > 0.05), respectively (fig. 2C). To analyze if differences in side chain length and lipophilicity may influence local anesthetic sensitivity of KCNQ2/Q3 channels the concentration-response curve of S(-) ropivacaine was also established. The IC50value for inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by S(-) ropivacaine was four times higher than the IC50value for bupivacaine (748 ± 85 μm). The Hill coefficient was 1.0 ± 0.1 (mean ± SEM, n = 18).
Fig. 2. (  A  ) Original current traces demonstrating inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine. Shown are current traces under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The concentration-response data were described by Hill functions. The IC50value was 173 ± 7 μm, the Hill coefficient was 1.4 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.88 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 37) in the case of the ramp protocol. The concentration-response curve for the rectangular pulse protocol showed an IC50value of 217 ± 9 μm, a Hill coefficient of 1.3 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.91 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 31). (  C  ) Original current traces demonstrating the inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 currents by bupivacaine (200 μm) and levobupivacaine (200 μm). The extent of inhibition was not different between the racemate and its S(-) enantiomer (42 ± 4% [n = 7],  versus  42 ± 5% [n = 10];  P  > 0.05). (  D  ) The effect of bupivacaine on homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels. Original current traces of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels under control and washout conditions and under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm). No significant difference in the inhibition of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels by bupivacaine (62 ± 4% (n = 7)  versus  60 ± 8% (n = 5);  P  > 0.05) was observed. 
Fig. 2. (  A  ) Original current traces demonstrating inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine. Shown are current traces under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The concentration-response data were described by Hill functions. The IC50value was 173 ± 7 μm, the Hill coefficient was 1.4 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.88 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 37) in the case of the ramp protocol. The concentration-response curve for the rectangular pulse protocol showed an IC50value of 217 ± 9 μm, a Hill coefficient of 1.3 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.91 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 31). (  C  ) Original current traces demonstrating the inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 currents by bupivacaine (200 μm) and levobupivacaine (200 μm). The extent of inhibition was not different between the racemate and its S(-) enantiomer (42 ± 4% [n = 7],  versus  42 ± 5% [n = 10];  P  > 0.05). (  D  ) The effect of bupivacaine on homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels. Original current traces of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels under control and washout conditions and under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm). No significant difference in the inhibition of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels by bupivacaine (62 ± 4% (n = 7)  versus  60 ± 8% (n = 5);  P  > 0.05) was observed. 
Fig. 2. (  A  ) Original current traces demonstrating inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine. Shown are current traces under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The concentration-response data were described by Hill functions. The IC50value was 173 ± 7 μm, the Hill coefficient was 1.4 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.88 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 37) in the case of the ramp protocol. The concentration-response curve for the rectangular pulse protocol showed an IC50value of 217 ± 9 μm, a Hill coefficient of 1.3 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.91 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 31). (  C  ) Original current traces demonstrating the inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 currents by bupivacaine (200 μm) and levobupivacaine (200 μm). The extent of inhibition was not different between the racemate and its S(-) enantiomer (42 ± 4% [n = 7],  versus  42 ± 5% [n = 10];  P  > 0.05). (  D  ) The effect of bupivacaine on homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels. Original current traces of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels under control and washout conditions and under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm). No significant difference in the inhibition of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels by bupivacaine (62 ± 4% (n = 7)  versus  60 ± 8% (n = 5);  P  > 0.05) was observed. 
×
KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels are supposed to form the heteromeric channel underlying the M-current.4,5 However, both subunits can also form homomeric channels with M-like currents but smaller amplitudes than the heteromeric channels. As homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels have distinct pharmacological sensitivity to e.g.  , tetraethylammonium, we tested whether KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels also differ in their sensitivity to bupivacaine. The current amplitudes of homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels were 3610 ± 121 pA (n = 5) and 273 ± 97 pA (n = 5), respectively (fig. 2D). KCNQ2 channels, thus, gave rise to currents 14-fold larger than homomeric KCNQ3 channels and fourfold smaller than heteromeric KCNQ2/Q3 channels. A possible difference in the sensitivity to bupivacaine was tested at a concentration close to the IC50-value for the inhibition of heteromeric KCNQ2/Q3 channels (200 μm). The results demonstrated that bupivacaine (200 μm) inhibited KCNQ2 channels to the same extent as KCNQ3 channels (62 ± 4% [n = 7]versus  60 ± 8% [n = 5]; P  > 0.05; fig. 2D).
After establishing the sensitivity of KCNQ2/Q3 channels to the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine the action of the local anesthetic on these ion channels was investigated in more detail at a single concentration (1000 μm; fig. 3A). For this purpose a pulse protocol was used that allowed to detect effects on current activation as well as a possible voltage-dependence of channel block. Bupivacaine did not alter the voltage-dependence of channel activation; Vmidwas −25.2 ± 3.6 mV under control and washout condition and it was −23.3 ± 4.2 mV during the action of bupivacaine (n = 5; P  > 0.05; fig. 3B). The local anesthetic, however, accelerated the time course of channel activation. Under control and washout conditions, the time constants monoexponentially declined with voltage from a value of 804 ± 187 ms at −40 mV to a value of 89 ± 6 ms at + 30 mV (n = 5; fig. 3C). Under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm), channel activation was approximately four times faster at the membrane potential of −40 mV (210 ± 76 ms versus  804 ± 187 ms), and the time constants linearly declined with increasing voltages (fig. 3C). Linear regression analysis yielded a regression coefficient of r = 0.98 and a negative slope of the regression line of −1.69. Voltage-dependence of inhibition was analyzed by quantifying the reduction of the whole cell conductance at different membrane potentials under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm) (fig. 3D). No significant voltage-dependence of inhibition was observed. The whole cell conductance was inhibited by 69 ± 7% at a membrane potential of −40 mV and by 69 ± 4% at a membrane potential of +30 mV, respectively (n = 5; P  > 0.05).
Fig. 3. (  A  ) Original current recordings of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control conditions, during the application of bupivacaine (1000 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The conductance-voltage relationships under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm) and under control and washout conditions (activation midpoint −23.3 ± 4.2 mV  versus  −25.2 ± 3.6, n = 5;  P  > 0.05). (  C  ) The time constants under control and washout conditions were dependent on voltage. The decline under control and washout conditions was exponential, whereas under the influence of bupivacaine a linear decline was observed. Bupivacaine (1000 μm) accelerated channel activation. At the membrane potential of −40 mV activation was approximately four times faster compared to control and washout conditions (804 ± 187 ms  versus  210 ± 76 ms). (  D  ) For the analysis of voltage-dependence of bupivacaine block inhibition of the whole cell conductance (Gmax) was analyzed. No significant voltage-dependence of inhibition was observed. Inhibition of Gmaxat −40 mV was 69 ± 7%  versus  69 ± 4% at + 30 mV, n = 5;  P  > 0.05. 
Fig. 3. (  A  ) Original current recordings of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control conditions, during the application of bupivacaine (1000 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The conductance-voltage relationships under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm) and under control and washout conditions (activation midpoint −23.3 ± 4.2 mV  versus  −25.2 ± 3.6, n = 5;  P  > 0.05). (  C  ) The time constants under control and washout conditions were dependent on voltage. The decline under control and washout conditions was exponential, whereas under the influence of bupivacaine a linear decline was observed. Bupivacaine (1000 μm) accelerated channel activation. At the membrane potential of −40 mV activation was approximately four times faster compared to control and washout conditions (804 ± 187 ms  versus  210 ± 76 ms). (  D  ) For the analysis of voltage-dependence of bupivacaine block inhibition of the whole cell conductance (Gmax) was analyzed. No significant voltage-dependence of inhibition was observed. Inhibition of Gmaxat −40 mV was 69 ± 7%  versus  69 ± 4% at + 30 mV, n = 5;  P  > 0.05. 
Fig. 3. (  A  ) Original current recordings of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control conditions, during the application of bupivacaine (1000 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The conductance-voltage relationships under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm) and under control and washout conditions (activation midpoint −23.3 ± 4.2 mV  versus  −25.2 ± 3.6, n = 5;  P  > 0.05). (  C  ) The time constants under control and washout conditions were dependent on voltage. The decline under control and washout conditions was exponential, whereas under the influence of bupivacaine a linear decline was observed. Bupivacaine (1000 μm) accelerated channel activation. At the membrane potential of −40 mV activation was approximately four times faster compared to control and washout conditions (804 ± 187 ms  versus  210 ± 76 ms). (  D  ) For the analysis of voltage-dependence of bupivacaine block inhibition of the whole cell conductance (Gmax) was analyzed. No significant voltage-dependence of inhibition was observed. Inhibition of Gmaxat −40 mV was 69 ± 7%  versus  69 ± 4% at + 30 mV, n = 5;  P  > 0.05. 
×
After characterizing the effects of bupivacaine on KCNQ2/Q3 channels the interaction of retigabine and bupivacaine simultaneously applied to KCNQ2/Q3 channels was investigated. The pharmacological interaction of both drugs was analyzed with an increasing ramp pulse protocol and the following experimental sequence (fig. 4, A, B, and C). First KCNQ2/Q3 channels were measured under drug-free conditions. Then bupivacaine was applied on the cells at a concentration of neurotoxic relevance29 (100 μm). As a next step different concentrations of retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, and 10 μm) were simultaneously applied with bupivacaine (100 μm) on the cells, followed by the washout of the drugs. As predicted from the concentration-response curve (fig. 2B), bupivacaine (100 μm) given alone significantly reduced the charge transfer through KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 22 ± 9% (n = 12; P  < 0.01; fig. 4A). During simultaneous application of retigabine and bupivacaine (100 μm) the current amplitude and the area under the current versus  time curve were larger, as during the application of bupivacaine alone. Retigabine thus reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine on KCNQ2/Q3 currents. This effect was dependent on the concentration of retigabine and it was already present at the lowest concentration of retigabine (300 nm) tested (78 ± 9% versus  89 ± 11% of control value, n = 12 paired experiments; P  < 0.05; fig. 4A). The anticonvulsant at 300 nm not only significantly stimulated KCNQ2/Q3 channels in the presence of bupivacaine (fig. 4A), but the stimulatory effect was also larger in the presence of bupivacaine than in the absence of the local anesthetic (13 ± 5% versus  7 ± 4%, n = 7; P  < 0.05). Retigabine at 1 μm completely abolished the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine and retigabine at 10 μm increased KCNQ2/Q3 currents in the presence of bupivacaine (100 μm) even when compared to control values (fig. 4, B and C).
Fig. 4. Original current traces of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control and washout conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine, and after simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. The diagrams show the changes in charge transfer (Qnorm) that were normalized to control values and compared with the respective means of control and washout. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited Qnormby 22 ± 9% (n = 12 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (300 nm) significantly reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (300 nm) alone was significantly larger compared to the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  B  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 23 ± 6% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (1 μm) completely reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (1 μm) alone was significantly larger compared with the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  C  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 24 ± 8% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) doubled the charge transfer compared with control values. No significant effect was observed after application of retigabine (10 μm) alone compared to the respective simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm). 
Fig. 4. Original current traces of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control and washout conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine, and after simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. The diagrams show the changes in charge transfer (Qnorm) that were normalized to control values and compared with the respective means of control and washout. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited Qnormby 22 ± 9% (n = 12 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (300 nm) significantly reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (300 nm) alone was significantly larger compared to the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  B  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 23 ± 6% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (1 μm) completely reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (1 μm) alone was significantly larger compared with the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  C  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 24 ± 8% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) doubled the charge transfer compared with control values. No significant effect was observed after application of retigabine (10 μm) alone compared to the respective simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm). 
Fig. 4. Original current traces of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control and washout conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine, and after simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. The diagrams show the changes in charge transfer (Qnorm) that were normalized to control values and compared with the respective means of control and washout. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited Qnormby 22 ± 9% (n = 12 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (300 nm) significantly reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (300 nm) alone was significantly larger compared to the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  B  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 23 ± 6% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (1 μm) completely reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (1 μm) alone was significantly larger compared with the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  C  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 24 ± 8% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) doubled the charge transfer compared with control values. No significant effect was observed after application of retigabine (10 μm) alone compared to the respective simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm). 
×
The interaction of retigabine and bupivacaine was further investigated by analyzing drug-induced changes of the tail current amplitude and deactivation kinetics at −100 mV (fig. 5A). Whereas the time course of channel deactivation under control conditions was best described by a single exponential process (τ= 13.4 ± 3.3 ms, n = 10) deactivation of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under the influence of retigabine followed a biexponential process (τfast= 11.9 ± 5.1 ms, τslow= 70.7 ± 26.3 ms, n = 10; P  < 0.05, data not shown). Bupivacaine reduced the tail current amplitude from −6.6 ± 3.5 nA under control conditions to −4.0 ± 2.1 nA (n = 6; P  < 0.05; fig. 5B). The deactivation time constant of KCNQ2/Q3 channels recorded during the application of the local anesthetic was increased from 13.4 ± 3.3 ms to 15.1 ± 2.9 ms (n = 10; P  < 0.05, fig. 5C). In the presence of bupivacaine retigabine increased the tail current amplitude from −4.0 ± 2.1 nA recorded under the influence of bupivacaine alone to −5.9 ± 2.5 nA recorded when bupivacaine and retigabine were simultaneously applied (n = 6; P  < 0.05; fig. 5B). The anticonvulsant was furthermore still capable of slowing current deactivation despite the presence of the local anesthetic (τfast= 12 ± 6.9 ms, τslow= 85.8 ± 40.1 ms, n = 10; P  < 0.05). Both time constants of tail current deactivation were not significantly different between currents in the presence of retigabine as compared to currents in the presence of retigabine together with bupivacaine. Analysis of the voltage-dependence of the interaction of retigabine and bupivacaine revealed that retigabine reversed the inhibitory action of bupivacaine primarily by shifting the normalized charge-voltage relationship to hyperpolarized potentials (fig. 5D).
Fig. 5. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) reduced the current amplitude and the simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) slowed the deactivation kinetic. Shown in the inset below the current recording is a scheme of the pulse protocol together with an original current trace elicited by the protocol. (  B  ) The maximum current amplitude of the tail current under control conditions was −6.6 ± 3.5 nA; bupivacaine (100 μm) decreased the amplitude −4.0 ± 2.1 nA. Simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) resulted in a current amplitude of −5.9 ± 2.5 nA (n = 6 paired experiments). (  C  ) After simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) the time constants for deactivation (85.8 ± 40.1 ms) were significantly larger than under control (13.4 ± 3.3 ms) as well as under bupivacaine (15.1 ± 2.9 ms) conditions (n = 10 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). (  D  ) The normalized charge (tail current  versus  time curve) under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (100 μm), and during simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) was plotted against the test potential. 
Fig. 5. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) reduced the current amplitude and the simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) slowed the deactivation kinetic. Shown in the inset below the current recording is a scheme of the pulse protocol together with an original current trace elicited by the protocol. (  B  ) The maximum current amplitude of the tail current under control conditions was −6.6 ± 3.5 nA; bupivacaine (100 μm) decreased the amplitude −4.0 ± 2.1 nA. Simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) resulted in a current amplitude of −5.9 ± 2.5 nA (n = 6 paired experiments). (  C  ) After simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) the time constants for deactivation (85.8 ± 40.1 ms) were significantly larger than under control (13.4 ± 3.3 ms) as well as under bupivacaine (15.1 ± 2.9 ms) conditions (n = 10 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). (  D  ) The normalized charge (tail current  versus  time curve) under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (100 μm), and during simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) was plotted against the test potential. 
Fig. 5. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) reduced the current amplitude and the simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) slowed the deactivation kinetic. Shown in the inset below the current recording is a scheme of the pulse protocol together with an original current trace elicited by the protocol. (  B  ) The maximum current amplitude of the tail current under control conditions was −6.6 ± 3.5 nA; bupivacaine (100 μm) decreased the amplitude −4.0 ± 2.1 nA. Simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) resulted in a current amplitude of −5.9 ± 2.5 nA (n = 6 paired experiments). (  C  ) After simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) the time constants for deactivation (85.8 ± 40.1 ms) were significantly larger than under control (13.4 ± 3.3 ms) as well as under bupivacaine (15.1 ± 2.9 ms) conditions (n = 10 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). (  D  ) The normalized charge (tail current  versus  time curve) under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (100 μm), and during simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) was plotted against the test potential. 
×
Inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels depolarizes neuronal cell membranes whereas activation of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by retigabine would consequently hyperpolarize the membrane potential of neuronal cells. We therefore tested in our model system the effects of bupivacaine and retigabine on the membrane potential of Chinese hamster ovary cells expressing KCNQ2/Q3 channels. The original recordings of the membrane potential demonstrated that bupivacaine depolarized the membrane potential of Chinese hamster ovary cells expressing KCNQ2/Q3 channels. The depolarizing action of the local anesthetic was reversed by retigabine (fig. 6A). Under control conditions the cells expressing KCNQ2/Q3 had a resting membrane potential of −49.0 ± 7.2 mV (n = 11). Bupivacaine depolarized the membrane potential in a concentration-dependent and reversible manner by 1.5 ± 1.1 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5; P  < 0.05) and by 3.1 ± 1.6 mV (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6; P  < 0.05) (fig. 6B). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine (10 μm) resulted in an immediate hyperpolarization of the membrane potential by −18.9 ± 4.8 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5; P  < 0.05) and by −18.2 ± 3.5 mV, respectively (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6; P  < 0.05).
Fig. 6. (  A  ) Original membrane recordings under the influence of bupivacaine (300 μm), simultaneous application of bupivacaine (300 μm) and retigabine (10 μm), and under control and washout conditions. (  B  ) The cells had a resting membrane potential of −49.0 ± 7.2 mV (n = 11). Bupivacaine induced an immediate depolarization of the membrane potential that was concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. Bupivacaine (100 μm, 300 μm) depolarized the membrane potential by 1.5 ± 1.1 mV (n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by 3.1 ± 1.6 (n = 6;  P  < 0.05), respectively. The simultaneous application of bupivacaine with retigabine resulted in an immediate hyperpolarization of the membrane potential by −18.9 ± 4.8 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by −18.2 ± 3.5 mV respectively (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6;  P  < 0.05). 
Fig. 6. (  A  ) Original membrane recordings under the influence of bupivacaine (300 μm), simultaneous application of bupivacaine (300 μm) and retigabine (10 μm), and under control and washout conditions. (  B  ) The cells had a resting membrane potential of −49.0 ± 7.2 mV (n = 11). Bupivacaine induced an immediate depolarization of the membrane potential that was concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. Bupivacaine (100 μm, 300 μm) depolarized the membrane potential by 1.5 ± 1.1 mV (n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by 3.1 ± 1.6 (n = 6;  P  < 0.05), respectively. The simultaneous application of bupivacaine with retigabine resulted in an immediate hyperpolarization of the membrane potential by −18.9 ± 4.8 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by −18.2 ± 3.5 mV respectively (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6;  P  < 0.05). 
Fig. 6. (  A  ) Original membrane recordings under the influence of bupivacaine (300 μm), simultaneous application of bupivacaine (300 μm) and retigabine (10 μm), and under control and washout conditions. (  B  ) The cells had a resting membrane potential of −49.0 ± 7.2 mV (n = 11). Bupivacaine induced an immediate depolarization of the membrane potential that was concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. Bupivacaine (100 μm, 300 μm) depolarized the membrane potential by 1.5 ± 1.1 mV (n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by 3.1 ± 1.6 (n = 6;  P  < 0.05), respectively. The simultaneous application of bupivacaine with retigabine resulted in an immediate hyperpolarization of the membrane potential by −18.9 ± 4.8 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by −18.2 ± 3.5 mV respectively (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6;  P  < 0.05). 
×
Discussion
The inhibitory effects of the long acting amide local anesthetic bupivacaine on human KCNQ2/Q3 channels as well as the interaction of bupivacaine with the anticonvulsant retigabine on these ion channels was investigated. In agreement with previous studies,5,11,12,30 KCNQ2/Q3 channels exhibited slowly activating and noninactivating currents. Retigabine stimulated KCNQ2/Q3 channels by shifting the voltage-dependence of activation to more hyperpolarized potentials,11,12,30 thereby causing hyperpolarization of the membrane potential of Chinese hamster ovary cells expressing KCNQ2/Q3 channels.
Inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine was concentration-dependent and reversible. Inhibition was voltage-independent, the local anesthetic did not induce inactivation-like behavior of the currents, and bupivacaine did not alter the time course of channel deactivation. These features are characteristic features of open channel block of voltage-dependent (Kv) channels by bupivacaine,24,25 and they result from direct interaction of the blocker with the pore region of the ion channel.31–33 The concentration of the local anesthetic necessary to inhibit KCNQ2/Q3 was higher by a factor of 5–10 than necessary for inhibition of Kv channels,24,34 and inhibition was not stereoselective. In contrast to Kv channels bupivacaine may thus exert its modifying effects on activation gating and its blocking effects on KCNQ2/Q3 channels by a mechanism that does not involve direct interaction with the ion channel pore. As homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels are equally as sensitive to the inhibitory effect, bupivacaine interaction with KCNQ2/Q3 channels is also unlikely to involve the external binding site of tetraethylammonium.5 The observation that the less lipophilic local anesthetic S(-) ropivacaine is less potent an inhibitor of KCNQ2/Q3 channels than bupivacaine, and also levobupivacaine suggests hydrophobic properties of the site for local anesthetic interaction with KCNQ2/Q3 channels. Bupivacaine alters the time- and voltage-dependence of channel activation. The local anesthetic may thus bias the local field potential near the voltage-sensing activation domains of KCNQ2/Q3 channels. Two sequences in voltage-gated K+ channels are essential for coupling the voltage sensors to the intracellular activation gate.35 One sequence is the so called S4-S5 linker distal to the voltage-sensing S4, and the other is around the COOH-terminal end of S6. As the linker between S4-S5 has been identified as a region involved in anesthetic drug binding to voltage-dependent K channels,36 interaction of local anesthetics with KCNQ2/Q3 channels may also involve this part of the ion channel protein.
Retigabine reverses the inhibitory effects of bupivacaine on KCNQ2/Q3 channels. The stimulation of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by retigabine in the presence of bupivacaine is the result of a hyperpolarizing shift of channel activation by the anticonvulsant. Retigabine is, thus, still capable of exerting its gating modifying effect on KCNQ2/Q3 channels in the presence of micromolar concentrations of bupivacaine. Furthermore, the observation that retigabine at 300 nm stimulates KCNQ2/Q3 channels to a greater extent in the presence of bupivacaine than in the absence of bupivacaine suggests that bupivacaine may even increase the sensitivity of KCNQ2/Q3 channels to the gating modifying effect of retigabine. Bupivacaine, therefore, seems to negatively interfere neither with the binding of the anticonvulsant to the channels nor with the effect of retigabine on channel gating. These results may imply that the interaction of retigabine and bupivacaine with KCNQ2/Q3 channels occurs at distinct sites of the ion channel protein. The reversal of the inhibitory action of bupivacaine on KCNQ2/Q3 channels by retigabine is thus unlikely to result from a competitive antagonism.
In view of the pathophysiological significance of KCNQ2/Q3 channels in a human form of epilepsy, these ion channels may constitute a molecular target relevant for local anesthetic-induced seizures. However, if KCNQ2/Q3 channels would be a relevant molecular target one may expect different inhibitory potencies of bupivacaine and levobupivacaine because both local anesthetics are supposed to differ in their neurotoxic profiles.37 As the extent of channel inhibition did not differ between bupivacaine and levobupivacaine, an involvement of KCNQ2/Q3 channels in the generation of local anesthetic-induced seizures may be questionable. It was not the aim of our study to resolve whether inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine constitutes a relevant molecular mechanism involved in neurotoxic action of bupivacaine, and the results of our study do not allow such resolution. Nonetheless, retigabine at clinically relevant concentrations38,39 stimulates KCNQ2/Q3 channels in the presence of toxic concentrations of bupivacaine. Our data therefore suggest that potassium channel stimulation may offer a novel therapeutic approach not only for the treatment of cardiotoxic side effects40 but also for the treatment of neurotoxic side effects of local anesthetics such as seizure. This novel therapeutic strategy may be advantageous to currently recommended drugs such as benzodiazepines or barbiturates,26,27 as the use of retigabine has not been reported to cause respiratory depression.
In summary, the results of this study demonstrate that bupivacaine inhibits KCNQ2/Q3 channels in a concentration-dependent and reversible manner. The anticonvulsant retigabine at nanomolar concentrations reverses the inhibitory effect of micromolar concentrations of bupivacaine. Our results allow the hypothesis that activation of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by retigabine may offer a novel therapeutic approach for the treatment of bupivacaine-induced seizures.
The authors thank Andrea Zaisser, Medical Technical Assistant, Institute of Neural Signal Transduction, Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University of Hamburg, Germany, for cell culture, Dirk Isbrandt, M.D., and Howard Christian Peters, Ph.D., Institute of Neural Signal Transduction, Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University of Hamburg, Germany for providing clones of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels. The authors are very grateful for the support of Professor Olaf Pongs, Ph.D., Director, Institute of Neural Signal Transduction, Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University of Hamburg, Germany. The authors thank Prof. Olaf Pongs and Dr. Dirk Isbrandt for critically reading the manuscript.
References
Jentsch TJ: Neuronal KCNQ potassium channels: Physiology and role in disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 2000; 1:21–30Jentsch, TJ
Cooper EC, Aldape KD, Abosch A, Barbaro NM, Berger MS, Peacock WS, Jan YN, Jan LY: Colocalization and coassembly of two human brain M-type potassium channel subunits that are mutated in epilepsy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000; 97:4914–9Cooper, EC Aldape, KD Abosch, A Barbaro, NM Berger, MS Peacock, WS Jan, YN Jan, LY
Passmore GM, Selyanko AA, Mistry M, Al-Qatari M, Marsh SJ, Matthews EA, Dickenson AH, Brown TA, Burbidge SA, Main M, Brown DA: KCNQ/M currents in sensory neurons: Significance for pain therapy. J Neurosci 2003; 23:7227–36Passmore, GM Selyanko, AA Mistry, M Al-Qatari, M Marsh, SJ Matthews, EA Dickenson, AH Brown, TA Burbidge, SA Main, M Brown, DA
Brown DA, Adams PR: Muscarinic suppression of a novel voltage-sensitive K+ current in a vertebrate neurone. Nature 1980; 14:673–6Brown, DA Adams, PR
Wang HS, Pan Z, Shi W, Brown BS, Wymore RS, Cohen IS, Dixon JE, McKinnon D: KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 potassium channel subunits: Molecular correlates of the M-channel. Science 1998; 282:1890–3Wang, HS Pan, Z Shi, W Brown, BS Wymore, RS Cohen, IS Dixon, JE McKinnon, D
Marrion NV: Control of the M-current. Annu Rev Physiol 1997; 59:483–504Marrion, NV
Biervert C, Schroeder BC, Kubisch C, Berkovic SF, Propping P, Jentsch TJ, Steinlein OK: A potassium channel mutation in neonatal human epilepsy. Science 1998; 16:403–6Biervert, C Schroeder, BC Kubisch, C Berkovic, SF Propping, P Jentsch, TJ Steinlein, OK
Charlier C, Singh NA, Ryan SG, Lewis TB, Reus BE, Leach RJ, Leppert M: A pore mutation in a novel KQT-like potassium channel gene in an idiopathic epilepsy family. Nat Genet 1998; 18:53–5Charlier, C Singh, NA Ryan, SG Lewis, TB Reus, BE Leach, RJ Leppert, M
Singh NA, Charlier C, Stauffer D, DuPont BR, Leach RJ, Melis R, Ronen GM, Bjerre I, Quattlebaum T, Murphy JV, McHarg ML, Gagnon D, Rosales TO, Peiffer A, Anderson VE, Leppert M: A novel potassium channel gene, KCNQ2, is mutated in an inherited epilepsy of newborns. Nat Genet 1998; 18:25–9Singh, NA Charlier, C Stauffer, D DuPont, BR Leach, RJ Melis, R Ronen, GM Bjerre, I Quattlebaum, T Murphy, JV McHarg, ML Gagnon, D Rosales, TO Peiffer, A Anderson, VE Leppert, M
Lerche H, Jurkat-Rott K, Lehmann-Horn F: Ion channels and epilepsy. Am J Med Genet 2001; 106:146–59Lerche, H Jurkat-Rott, K Lehmann-Horn, F
Rundfeldt C, Netzer R: The novel anticonvulsant retigabine activates M-currents in Chinese hamster ovary-cells tranfected with human KCNQ2/3 subunits. Neurosci Lett 2000; 282:73–6Rundfeldt, C Netzer, R
Wickenden AD, Yu W, Zou A, Jegla T, Wagoner PK: Retigabine, a novel anti-convulsant, enhances activation of KCNQ2/Q3 potassium channels. Mol Pharmacol 2000; 58:591–600Wickenden, AD Yu, W Zou, A Jegla, T Wagoner, PK
Otto JF, Kimball MM, Wilcox KS: Effects of the anticonvulsant retigabine on cultured cortical neurons: Changes in electroresponsive properties and synaptic transmission. Mol Pharmacol 2002; 61:921–7Otto, JF Kimball, MM Wilcox, KS
Hetka R, Rundfeldt C, Heinemann U and Schmitz D: Retigabine strongly reduces repetitive firing in rat entorhinal cortex. Eur J Pharmacol 1999; 386:165–71Hetka, R Rundfeldt, C Heinemann, U Schmitz, D
Rostock A, Tober C, Rundfeldt C, Bartsch R, Engel J, Polymeropoulos EE, Kutscher B, Loscher W, Honack D, White HS, Wolf HH: D-23129: A new anticonvulsant with a broad spectrum activity in animal models of epileptic seizures. Epilepsy Res 1996; 23:211–23Rostock, A Tober, C Rundfeldt, C Bartsch, R Engel, J Polymeropoulos, EE Kutscher, B Loscher, W Honack, D White, HS Wolf, HH
Bialer M, Johannessen SI, Kupferberg HJ, Levy RH, Loiseau P, Perucca E: Progress report on new antiepileptic drugs: A summary of the Sixth Eilat Conference (EILAT VI). Epilepsy Res 2002; 51:31–71Bialer, M Johannessen, SI Kupferberg, HJ Levy, RH Loiseau, P Perucca, E
Covino BG: Toxicity of local anesthetic agents. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg 1988; 39:159–64Covino, BG
Brown DL, Ransom DM, Hall JA, Leicht CH, Schroeder DR, Offord KP: Regional anesthesia and local anesthetic-induced systemic toxicity: Seizure frequency and accompanying cardiovascular changes. Anesth Analg 1995; 81:321–8Brown, DL Ransom, DM Hall, JA Leicht, CH Schroeder, DR Offord, KP
Auroy Y, Narchi P, Messiah A, Litt L, Rouvier B, Samii K: Serious complications related to regional anesthesia: Results of a prospective survey in France. Anesthesiology 1997; 87:479–86Auroy, Y Narchi, P Messiah, A Litt, L Rouvier, B Samii, K
Auroy Y, Benhamou D, Bargues L, Ecoffey C, Falissard B, Mercier FJ, Bouaziz H, Samii K, Mercier F: Major complications of regional anesthesia in France: The SOS Regional Anesthesia Hotline Service. Anesthesiology 2002; 97:1274–80Auroy, Y Benhamou, D Bargues, L Ecoffey, C Falissard, B Mercier, FJ Bouaziz, H Samii, K Mercier, F
Ikeda M, Dohi T, Tsujimoto A: Inhibition of gamma-aminobutyric acid release from synaptosomes by local anesthetics. Anesthesiology 1983; 58:495–9Ikeda, M Dohi, T Tsujimoto, A
Sugimoto M, Uchida I, Fukami S, Takenoshita M, Mashimo T, Yoshiya I: The alpha and gamma subunit-dependent effects of local anesthetics on recombinant GABA(A) receptors. Eur J Pharmacol 2000; 401:329–37Sugimoto, M Uchida, I Fukami, S Takenoshita, M Mashimo, T Yoshiya, I
McFarlane C, Warner DS, Dexter F, Todd MM: Glutamatergic antagonism: Effects on lidocaine-induced seizures in the rat. Anesth Analg 1994; 79:701–5McFarlane, C Warner, DS Dexter, F Todd, MM
Friederich P, Benzenberg D, Urban BW: Bupivacaine inhibits human neuronal Kv3 channels in SH-SY5Y human neuroblastoma cells. Br J Anaesth 2002; 88:864–6Friederich, P Benzenberg, D Urban, BW
Nilsson J, Madeja M, Arhem P: Local anesthetic block of Kv channels: Role of the S6 helix and the S5–S6 linker for bupivacaine action. Mol Pharmacol 2003; 63:1417–29Nilsson, J Madeja, M Arhem, P
Rozentsveig V, Yagev R, Wecksler N, Gurman G, Lifshitz T: Respiratory arrest and convulsions after peribulbar anesthesia. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27:960–2Rozentsveig, V Yagev, R Wecksler, N Gurman, G Lifshitz, T
Bisschop DY, Alardo JP, Razgallah B, Just BY, Germain ML, Millart HG, Trenque TC: Seizure induced by ropivacaine. Ann Pharmacother 2001; 35:311–3Bisschop, DY Alardo, JP Razgallah, B Just, BY Germain, ML Millart, HG Trenque, TC
Hamill OP, Marty A, Neher E, Sakmann B, Sigworth FJ: Improved patch-clamp techniques for high-resolution current recording from cells and cell-free membrane patches. Pflugers Arch 1981; 391:85–100Hamill, OP Marty, A Neher, E Sakmann, B Sigworth, FJ
Feldman HS, Arthur GR, Covino BG: Comparative systemic toxicity of convulsant and supraconvulsant doses of intravenous ropivacaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine in the conscious dog. Anesth Analg 1989; 69:794–801Feldman, HS Arthur, GR Covino, BG
Tatulian L, Delmas P, Abogadie FC, Brown DA: Activation of expressed KCNQ potassium currents and native neuronal M-type potassium currents by the anti-convulsant drug retigabine. J Neurosci 2001; 21:5535–45Tatulian, L Delmas, P Abogadie, FC Brown, DA
Armstrong CM: Inactivation of the potassium conductance and related phenomena caused by quaternary ammonium ion injection in squid axons. J Gen Physiol 1969; 54:553–75Armstrong, CM
Armstrong CM: Interaction of tetraethylammonium ion derivatives with the potassium channels of giant axons. J Gen Physiol 1971; 58:413–37Armstrong, CM
Zhou M, Morais-Cabral JH, Mann S, MacKinnon R: Potassium channel receptor site for the inactivation gate and quaternary amine inhibitors. Nature 2001; 411:657–61Zhou, M Morais-Cabral, JH Mann, S MacKinnon, R
Franqueza L, Longobardo M, Vicente J, Delpon E, Tamkun MM, Tamargo J, Snyders DJ, Valenzuela C: Molecular determinants of stereoselective bupivacaine block of hKv1. 5 channels. Circ Res 1997; 81:1053–64Franqueza, L Longobardo, M Vicente, J Delpon, E Tamkun, MM Tamargo, J Snyders, DJ Valenzuela, C
Lu Z, Klem AM, Ramu Y: Coupling between voltage sensors and activation gate in voltage-gated K+ channels. J Gen Physiol 2002; 120:663–76Lu, Z Klem, AM Ramu, Y
Harris T, Shahidullah M, Ellingson JS, Covarrubias M: General anesthetic action at an internal protein site involving the S4–S5 cytoplasmic loop of a neuronal K(+) channel. Biol Chem 2000; 275:4928–36Harris, T Shahidullah, M Ellingson, JS Covarrubias, M
Huang YF, Pryor ME, Mather LE, Veering BT: Cardiovascular and central nervous system effects of intravenous levobupivacaine and bupivacaine in sheep. Anesth Analg 1998; 86:797–804Huang, YF Pryor, ME Mather, LE Veering, BT
Hermann R, Ferron GM, Erb K, Knebel N, Ruus P, Paul J, Richards L, Cnota HP, Troy S: Effects of age and sex on the disposition of retigabine. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2003; 73:61–70Hermann, R Ferron, GM Erb, K Knebel, N Ruus, P Paul, J Richards, L Cnota, HP Troy, S
Ferron GM, Paul J, Fruncillo R, Richards L, Knebel N, Getsy J, Troy S: Multiple-dose, linear, dose-proportional pharmacokinetics of retigabine in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 42:175–82Ferron, GM Paul, J Fruncillo, R Richards, L Knebel, N Getsy, J Troy, S
de La Coussaye JE, Eledjam JJ, Peray P, Bruelle P, Lefrant JY, Bassoul B, Desch G, Gagnol JP, Sassine A: Lemakalim, a potassium channel agonist, reverses electrophysiological impairments induced by a large dose of bupivacaine in anaesthetized dogs. Br J Anaesth 1993; 71:534–9de La Coussaye, JE Eledjam, JJ Peray, P Bruelle, P Lefrant, JY Bassoul, B Desch, G Gagnol, JP Sassine, A
Fig. 1. (  A  ) Original current traces of human KCNQ2/Q3 channels transiently expressed in CHO cells channels ranging from −80 mV to 0 mV in 10-mV steps measured under control conditions and during the application of retigabine (10 μm). (  B  ) The shift of the activation curve under the influence of retigabine (10 μm), control, and washout. The activation midpoint was shifted by −21 ± 3 mV compared with the mean of control and washout (n = 5;  P  < 0.01). (  C  ) Original current traces elicited with the ramp pulse protocol. The effects of retigabine on KCNQ2/Q3 currents were concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. (  D  ) The effects of retigabine were normalized to control values. The diagram shows the retigabine effects compared to the respective mean of control and washout. Retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, and 10 μm) increased the charge transfer by 1.07 ± 0.04 (n = 7;  P  < 0.05); 1.46 ± 0.12 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01); 2.28 ± 0.43 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01)  .
Fig. 1. (  A  ) Original current traces of human KCNQ2/Q3 channels transiently expressed in CHO cells channels ranging from −80 mV to 0 mV in 10-mV steps measured under control conditions and during the application of retigabine (10 μm). (  B  ) The shift of the activation curve under the influence of retigabine (10 μm), control, and washout. The activation midpoint was shifted by −21 ± 3 mV compared with the mean of control and washout (n = 5;  P  < 0.01). (  C  ) Original current traces elicited with the ramp pulse protocol. The effects of retigabine on KCNQ2/Q3 currents were concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. (  D  ) The effects of retigabine were normalized to control values. The diagram shows the retigabine effects compared to the respective mean of control and washout. Retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, and 10 μm) increased the charge transfer by 1.07 ± 0.04 (n = 7;  P  < 0.05); 1.46 ± 0.12 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01); 2.28 ± 0.43 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01) 
	.
Fig. 1. (  A  ) Original current traces of human KCNQ2/Q3 channels transiently expressed in CHO cells channels ranging from −80 mV to 0 mV in 10-mV steps measured under control conditions and during the application of retigabine (10 μm). (  B  ) The shift of the activation curve under the influence of retigabine (10 μm), control, and washout. The activation midpoint was shifted by −21 ± 3 mV compared with the mean of control and washout (n = 5;  P  < 0.01). (  C  ) Original current traces elicited with the ramp pulse protocol. The effects of retigabine on KCNQ2/Q3 currents were concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. (  D  ) The effects of retigabine were normalized to control values. The diagram shows the retigabine effects compared to the respective mean of control and washout. Retigabine (300 nm, 1 μm, and 10 μm) increased the charge transfer by 1.07 ± 0.04 (n = 7;  P  < 0.05); 1.46 ± 0.12 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01); 2.28 ± 0.43 (n = 8;  P  < 0.01)  .
×
Fig. 2. (  A  ) Original current traces demonstrating inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine. Shown are current traces under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The concentration-response data were described by Hill functions. The IC50value was 173 ± 7 μm, the Hill coefficient was 1.4 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.88 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 37) in the case of the ramp protocol. The concentration-response curve for the rectangular pulse protocol showed an IC50value of 217 ± 9 μm, a Hill coefficient of 1.3 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.91 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 31). (  C  ) Original current traces demonstrating the inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 currents by bupivacaine (200 μm) and levobupivacaine (200 μm). The extent of inhibition was not different between the racemate and its S(-) enantiomer (42 ± 4% [n = 7],  versus  42 ± 5% [n = 10];  P  > 0.05). (  D  ) The effect of bupivacaine on homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels. Original current traces of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels under control and washout conditions and under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm). No significant difference in the inhibition of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels by bupivacaine (62 ± 4% (n = 7)  versus  60 ± 8% (n = 5);  P  > 0.05) was observed. 
Fig. 2. (  A  ) Original current traces demonstrating inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine. Shown are current traces under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The concentration-response data were described by Hill functions. The IC50value was 173 ± 7 μm, the Hill coefficient was 1.4 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.88 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 37) in the case of the ramp protocol. The concentration-response curve for the rectangular pulse protocol showed an IC50value of 217 ± 9 μm, a Hill coefficient of 1.3 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.91 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 31). (  C  ) Original current traces demonstrating the inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 currents by bupivacaine (200 μm) and levobupivacaine (200 μm). The extent of inhibition was not different between the racemate and its S(-) enantiomer (42 ± 4% [n = 7],  versus  42 ± 5% [n = 10];  P  > 0.05). (  D  ) The effect of bupivacaine on homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels. Original current traces of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels under control and washout conditions and under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm). No significant difference in the inhibition of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels by bupivacaine (62 ± 4% (n = 7)  versus  60 ± 8% (n = 5);  P  > 0.05) was observed. 
Fig. 2. (  A  ) Original current traces demonstrating inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 channels by bupivacaine. Shown are current traces under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The concentration-response data were described by Hill functions. The IC50value was 173 ± 7 μm, the Hill coefficient was 1.4 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.88 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 37) in the case of the ramp protocol. The concentration-response curve for the rectangular pulse protocol showed an IC50value of 217 ± 9 μm, a Hill coefficient of 1.3 ± 0.1, and the maximal block was 0.91 ± 0.01 (mean ± SEM, n = 31). (  C  ) Original current traces demonstrating the inhibition of KCNQ2/Q3 currents by bupivacaine (200 μm) and levobupivacaine (200 μm). The extent of inhibition was not different between the racemate and its S(-) enantiomer (42 ± 4% [n = 7],  versus  42 ± 5% [n = 10];  P  > 0.05). (  D  ) The effect of bupivacaine on homomeric KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels. Original current traces of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels under control and washout conditions and under the influence of bupivacaine (200 μm). No significant difference in the inhibition of KCNQ2 and KCNQ3 channels by bupivacaine (62 ± 4% (n = 7)  versus  60 ± 8% (n = 5);  P  > 0.05) was observed. 
×
Fig. 3. (  A  ) Original current recordings of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control conditions, during the application of bupivacaine (1000 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The conductance-voltage relationships under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm) and under control and washout conditions (activation midpoint −23.3 ± 4.2 mV  versus  −25.2 ± 3.6, n = 5;  P  > 0.05). (  C  ) The time constants under control and washout conditions were dependent on voltage. The decline under control and washout conditions was exponential, whereas under the influence of bupivacaine a linear decline was observed. Bupivacaine (1000 μm) accelerated channel activation. At the membrane potential of −40 mV activation was approximately four times faster compared to control and washout conditions (804 ± 187 ms  versus  210 ± 76 ms). (  D  ) For the analysis of voltage-dependence of bupivacaine block inhibition of the whole cell conductance (Gmax) was analyzed. No significant voltage-dependence of inhibition was observed. Inhibition of Gmaxat −40 mV was 69 ± 7%  versus  69 ± 4% at + 30 mV, n = 5;  P  > 0.05. 
Fig. 3. (  A  ) Original current recordings of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control conditions, during the application of bupivacaine (1000 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The conductance-voltage relationships under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm) and under control and washout conditions (activation midpoint −23.3 ± 4.2 mV  versus  −25.2 ± 3.6, n = 5;  P  > 0.05). (  C  ) The time constants under control and washout conditions were dependent on voltage. The decline under control and washout conditions was exponential, whereas under the influence of bupivacaine a linear decline was observed. Bupivacaine (1000 μm) accelerated channel activation. At the membrane potential of −40 mV activation was approximately four times faster compared to control and washout conditions (804 ± 187 ms  versus  210 ± 76 ms). (  D  ) For the analysis of voltage-dependence of bupivacaine block inhibition of the whole cell conductance (Gmax) was analyzed. No significant voltage-dependence of inhibition was observed. Inhibition of Gmaxat −40 mV was 69 ± 7%  versus  69 ± 4% at + 30 mV, n = 5;  P  > 0.05. 
Fig. 3. (  A  ) Original current recordings of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control conditions, during the application of bupivacaine (1000 μm), and after washout of the drug. (  B  ) The conductance-voltage relationships under the influence of bupivacaine (1000 μm) and under control and washout conditions (activation midpoint −23.3 ± 4.2 mV  versus  −25.2 ± 3.6, n = 5;  P  > 0.05). (  C  ) The time constants under control and washout conditions were dependent on voltage. The decline under control and washout conditions was exponential, whereas under the influence of bupivacaine a linear decline was observed. Bupivacaine (1000 μm) accelerated channel activation. At the membrane potential of −40 mV activation was approximately four times faster compared to control and washout conditions (804 ± 187 ms  versus  210 ± 76 ms). (  D  ) For the analysis of voltage-dependence of bupivacaine block inhibition of the whole cell conductance (Gmax) was analyzed. No significant voltage-dependence of inhibition was observed. Inhibition of Gmaxat −40 mV was 69 ± 7%  versus  69 ± 4% at + 30 mV, n = 5;  P  > 0.05. 
×
Fig. 4. Original current traces of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control and washout conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine, and after simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. The diagrams show the changes in charge transfer (Qnorm) that were normalized to control values and compared with the respective means of control and washout. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited Qnormby 22 ± 9% (n = 12 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (300 nm) significantly reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (300 nm) alone was significantly larger compared to the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  B  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 23 ± 6% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (1 μm) completely reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (1 μm) alone was significantly larger compared with the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  C  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 24 ± 8% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) doubled the charge transfer compared with control values. No significant effect was observed after application of retigabine (10 μm) alone compared to the respective simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm). 
Fig. 4. Original current traces of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control and washout conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine, and after simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. The diagrams show the changes in charge transfer (Qnorm) that were normalized to control values and compared with the respective means of control and washout. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited Qnormby 22 ± 9% (n = 12 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (300 nm) significantly reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (300 nm) alone was significantly larger compared to the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  B  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 23 ± 6% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (1 μm) completely reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (1 μm) alone was significantly larger compared with the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  C  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 24 ± 8% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) doubled the charge transfer compared with control values. No significant effect was observed after application of retigabine (10 μm) alone compared to the respective simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm). 
Fig. 4. Original current traces of KCNQ2/Q3 channels under control and washout conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine, and after simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. The diagrams show the changes in charge transfer (Qnorm) that were normalized to control values and compared with the respective means of control and washout. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited Qnormby 22 ± 9% (n = 12 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (300 nm) significantly reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (300 nm) alone was significantly larger compared to the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  B  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 23 ± 6% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (1 μm) completely reversed the inhibitory effect of bupivacaine (100 μm) alone. The stimulation of Qnormafter applications of retigabine (1 μm) alone was significantly larger compared with the simultaneous application of bupivacaine and retigabine. (  C  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) inhibited KCNQ2/Q3 channels by 24 ± 8% (n = 8 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). The simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) doubled the charge transfer compared with control values. No significant effect was observed after application of retigabine (10 μm) alone compared to the respective simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm). 
×
Fig. 5. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) reduced the current amplitude and the simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) slowed the deactivation kinetic. Shown in the inset below the current recording is a scheme of the pulse protocol together with an original current trace elicited by the protocol. (  B  ) The maximum current amplitude of the tail current under control conditions was −6.6 ± 3.5 nA; bupivacaine (100 μm) decreased the amplitude −4.0 ± 2.1 nA. Simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) resulted in a current amplitude of −5.9 ± 2.5 nA (n = 6 paired experiments). (  C  ) After simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) the time constants for deactivation (85.8 ± 40.1 ms) were significantly larger than under control (13.4 ± 3.3 ms) as well as under bupivacaine (15.1 ± 2.9 ms) conditions (n = 10 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). (  D  ) The normalized charge (tail current  versus  time curve) under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (100 μm), and during simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) was plotted against the test potential. 
Fig. 5. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) reduced the current amplitude and the simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) slowed the deactivation kinetic. Shown in the inset below the current recording is a scheme of the pulse protocol together with an original current trace elicited by the protocol. (  B  ) The maximum current amplitude of the tail current under control conditions was −6.6 ± 3.5 nA; bupivacaine (100 μm) decreased the amplitude −4.0 ± 2.1 nA. Simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) resulted in a current amplitude of −5.9 ± 2.5 nA (n = 6 paired experiments). (  C  ) After simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) the time constants for deactivation (85.8 ± 40.1 ms) were significantly larger than under control (13.4 ± 3.3 ms) as well as under bupivacaine (15.1 ± 2.9 ms) conditions (n = 10 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). (  D  ) The normalized charge (tail current  versus  time curve) under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (100 μm), and during simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) was plotted against the test potential. 
Fig. 5. (  A  ) Bupivacaine (100 μm) reduced the current amplitude and the simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) slowed the deactivation kinetic. Shown in the inset below the current recording is a scheme of the pulse protocol together with an original current trace elicited by the protocol. (  B  ) The maximum current amplitude of the tail current under control conditions was −6.6 ± 3.5 nA; bupivacaine (100 μm) decreased the amplitude −4.0 ± 2.1 nA. Simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) resulted in a current amplitude of −5.9 ± 2.5 nA (n = 6 paired experiments). (  C  ) After simultaneous application of bupivacaine (100 μm) and retigabine (10 μm) the time constants for deactivation (85.8 ± 40.1 ms) were significantly larger than under control (13.4 ± 3.3 ms) as well as under bupivacaine (15.1 ± 2.9 ms) conditions (n = 10 paired experiments;  P  < 0.05). (  D  ) The normalized charge (tail current  versus  time curve) under control conditions, under the influence of bupivacaine (100 μm), and during simultaneous application of retigabine (10 μm) and bupivacaine (100 μm) was plotted against the test potential. 
×
Fig. 6. (  A  ) Original membrane recordings under the influence of bupivacaine (300 μm), simultaneous application of bupivacaine (300 μm) and retigabine (10 μm), and under control and washout conditions. (  B  ) The cells had a resting membrane potential of −49.0 ± 7.2 mV (n = 11). Bupivacaine induced an immediate depolarization of the membrane potential that was concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. Bupivacaine (100 μm, 300 μm) depolarized the membrane potential by 1.5 ± 1.1 mV (n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by 3.1 ± 1.6 (n = 6;  P  < 0.05), respectively. The simultaneous application of bupivacaine with retigabine resulted in an immediate hyperpolarization of the membrane potential by −18.9 ± 4.8 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by −18.2 ± 3.5 mV respectively (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6;  P  < 0.05). 
Fig. 6. (  A  ) Original membrane recordings under the influence of bupivacaine (300 μm), simultaneous application of bupivacaine (300 μm) and retigabine (10 μm), and under control and washout conditions. (  B  ) The cells had a resting membrane potential of −49.0 ± 7.2 mV (n = 11). Bupivacaine induced an immediate depolarization of the membrane potential that was concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. Bupivacaine (100 μm, 300 μm) depolarized the membrane potential by 1.5 ± 1.1 mV (n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by 3.1 ± 1.6 (n = 6;  P  < 0.05), respectively. The simultaneous application of bupivacaine with retigabine resulted in an immediate hyperpolarization of the membrane potential by −18.9 ± 4.8 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by −18.2 ± 3.5 mV respectively (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6;  P  < 0.05). 
Fig. 6. (  A  ) Original membrane recordings under the influence of bupivacaine (300 μm), simultaneous application of bupivacaine (300 μm) and retigabine (10 μm), and under control and washout conditions. (  B  ) The cells had a resting membrane potential of −49.0 ± 7.2 mV (n = 11). Bupivacaine induced an immediate depolarization of the membrane potential that was concentration-dependent and reversible on washout. Bupivacaine (100 μm, 300 μm) depolarized the membrane potential by 1.5 ± 1.1 mV (n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by 3.1 ± 1.6 (n = 6;  P  < 0.05), respectively. The simultaneous application of bupivacaine with retigabine resulted in an immediate hyperpolarization of the membrane potential by −18.9 ± 4.8 mV (bupivacaine 100 μm, n = 5;  P  < 0.05) and by −18.2 ± 3.5 mV respectively (bupivacaine 300 μm, n = 6;  P  < 0.05). 
×