Free
Meeting Abstracts  |   July 2001
Sedative but Not Analgesic α2Agonist Tolerance Is Blocked by NMDA Receptor and Nitric Oxide Synthase Inhibitors
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • M. Frances Davies, Ph.D.
    *
  • Kristina Reid, B.S.
  • Tian-Zhi Guo, M.D.
  • Geeta S. Agashe, M.D.
  • Yogen K. Amin, M.B. Ch.B., F.R.C.A.
  • Mervyn Maze, M.B. Ch.B., F.R.C.A., F.R.C.P.
    §
  • * Assistant Professor, † Research Associate, § Professor, Department of Anesthesia, Stanford University & Anesthesiology, and Veterans Affairs. ‡ Research Associate, § Professor, Magill Department of Anaesthetics, Imperial College School of Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital.
  • Received from the Department of Anesthesia, Stanford University & Anesthesiology, and Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, and Magill Department of Anaesthetics, Imperial College School of Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Article Information
Meeting Abstracts   |   July 2001
Sedative but Not Analgesic α2Agonist Tolerance Is Blocked by NMDA Receptor and Nitric Oxide Synthase Inhibitors
Anesthesiology 7 2001, Vol.95, 184-191. doi:
Anesthesiology 7 2001, Vol.95, 184-191. doi:
IN the perioperative period, α2adrenergic agonists are efficacious for anxiolysis, 1 preoperative sedation, 2 and decreasing anesthetic requirements for volatile, 3 opioid, 4 and hypnotic agents. 5 Both systemically and neuraxially administered α2agonists, such as clonidine and dexmedetomidine, alleviate pain in humans and in animal models. The α2agonists produce analgesia by a supraspinal 6 as well as by a local spinal action. 7 Unlike local anesthetics, α2agonists do not profoundly change motor or sensory function, and unlike opioids, they do not produce respiratory depression 8 or induce drug-seeking behavior (i.e.  , addiction). Because of these features, α2adrenergic agonists are attractive candidates for pain management and are effective for the reduction of postoperative pain 9 and for pain relief during and after childbirth. 10,11 
The potential of prolonged treatment with α2agonists for chronic pain states has undergone limited testing 12 but seems to be very promising. 13 Clinical studies addressing the duration of the analgesic effects of epidural administration of α2agonists after prolonged administration have yet to be performed, although α2agonists are now being advocated for prolonged periods of administration 14 because of their potential benefit at each stage in the surgical patient’s perioperative care. However, biologically important adaptations to the immediate effects of α2agonists may lead to decreased drug effect over time; this is generally termed tolerance. Although tolerance to the sedative actions of clonidine rapidly develops and is considered desirable in the treatment of hypertension, it may lessen the effectiveness of α2agonists for chronic pain relief and prolonged sedation in the intensive care unit. 15 Tolerance to the analgesic action of spinally administered α2agonists may be minimal because prolonged epidural administration of clonidine produced clinically useful analgesia for the treatment of chronic pain throughout the course of treatment. 10 
Alterations in biologic responsiveness in the central nervous system—for example, long-term potentiation, central sensitization (“wind-up”), and tolerance—are referred to collectively as synaptic plasticity, and their molecular mechanisms may be similar despite diverse provocative settings. Previous studies showed that both the N  -methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor complex 16 and nitric oxide synthase (NOS) 17–19 are pivotal for some forms of synaptic plasticity. Many studies have also shown that tolerance to opioids can be prevented by blocking the actions of the NMDA receptor 20–23 and NOS. 24,25 Because the second messenger systems activated by opioid and α2receptors are very similar, 26,27 tolerance to α2adrenergic agonists may also be sensitive to the blockade of these same sites. From previous studies, we were also aware that it required less exposure to α2agonists to achieve hypnotic tolerance than to achieve analgesic tolerance, 28 suggesting that these two forms of tolerance had different biologic substrates. To test for the involvement of the NMDA receptor and NOS in the mechanism of tolerance to the hypnotic and analgesic effects of α2adrenergic agonists, we undertook a series of studies to determine whether antagonism of these functional proteins could prevent the induction or the expression of this tolerance.
Methods
The experimental protocol was approved by the Animal Care and Use Committee of the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. Male Sprague-Dawley rats (B&K, Fremont, CA) weighing 250–350 g were used. The rats were stratified to match the distribution of the weights in the groups as closely as possible. All tests were performed between 10 am and 6 pm. The number of animals for each experiment is listed in the figure legends.
Development of Tolerance
Rats were made tolerant to the anesthetic action of an α2agonist, dexmedetomidine, as previously described. 29 Briefly, dexmedetomidine was chronically administered to rats using Alzet®osmotic minipumps (model 2002 or 1007D; Alza, Palo Alto CA), which discharge their contents at a mean pumping rate of 0.48 ± 0.02 μl/h. The pumps were inserted subcutaneously during isoflurane anesthesia in the dorsal thoracic region and loaded to administer 5 μg · kg−1· h−1for 7 days to induce hypnotic tolerance and 10 μg · kg−1· h−1for 14 days to induce analgesic tolerance. These dosing schedules were previously found to be optimal to generate a tolerant hypnotic or analgesic state. 28 When MK-801 or   -nitro-l-arginine (NO2-arginine) was coadministered with dexmedetomidine, these compounds were included in the same pump. Previous studies 28 have reported that the behavioral responses measured in sham surgery animals did not differ from rats implanted with pumps containing saline; therefore, the former were used. The appropriateness of substituting sham surgery for saline-filled pumps was also confirmed for analgesia studies. For the MK-801 and NO2-arginine hypnotic experiments, the pumps were removed 1 day before behavioral testing. This was to ensure that the effects observed were caused by the challenge dose of dexmedetomidine. Preliminary experiments found that removing the pumps did not qualitatively alter the results. In all other experiments, the pumps were not removed before testing.
Loss of Righting Reflex
Hypnotic response to dexmedetomidine, was defined by the loss of the rat’s righting reflex, and its duration was measured in minutes and referred to as sleep time. The duration of the loss of righting reflex was assessed as the time from the rat’s inability to right itself when placed on its back until the time when it spontaneously reverted completely to the prone position. The hypnotic response test was performed between 10 am and 6 pm as described previously. 29 
Nociceptive Testing Procedures
Nociceptive response was assessed by the tail-flick response to a noxious thermal stimulus 40 min after administration of the dexmedetomidine challenge dose. A high-intensity light beam was focused on the tail, and the time for the rat to move its tail out of the light was recorded as tail-flick latency. This method has been described in the previous report. 6 The latencies from three sites on the tail were averaged. A cut-off time of 10 s was predetermined to prevent tissue damage. Baseline measurements consisted of a set of three tail-flick determinations at 2-min intervals. Baseline tail-flick latencies ranged between 3 and 4 s.
Drug Preparation
The NOS inhibitor NO2-arginine (Sigma, St. Louis, MO) and the NMDA antagonists MK-801 (RBI, Natick, MA) and ketamine (Sigma) were diluted in normal saline and were acutely administered intraperitoneally or chronically by means of Alzet®osmotic minipumps (model 2002 or 1007D).
To minimize the number of pumps implanted into a rat, it was desirable to determine whether two drugs could be effectively administered in one pump. To test whether the concentrated solutions of MK-801 and NO2-arginine had an effect on the chemical stability of dexmedetomidine, MK-801 (9.6 mg/ml) or NO2-arginine (5 mg/ml) were mixed with dexmedetomidine (6 mg/ml) and incubated at 37°C for 14 days. These solutions were then diluted 40-fold to achieve a 150-μg/kg dose of dexmedetomidine, and these were injected into drug-naïve rats. The duration of loss of righting reflex was measured.
Statistical Analysis
Loss of righting reflex and tail-flick data were analyzed using analysis of variance followed by post hoc  Bonferroni tests or the Dunnett multiple comparison test or t  test when appropriate.
Results
Dose–Response Relation for Dexmedetomidine in Sham-treated and Chronically Treated Animals
The dose–response relations for the hypnotic and analgesic effect of dexmedetomidine are shown in figure 1. The hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine dose dependently increased in sham-treated animals but was almost completely absent in rats treated for 7 days, even when large doses were administered (fig. 1A). A biphasic dose–response curve for this action of dexmedetomidine, with a maximal efficacy of approximately 300 μg/kg, has been previously shown and has been shown to be caused by a stimulatory action of dexmedetomidine mediated by activation of α1receptors. 30 Exposure to dexmedetomidine for 14 days shifted the analgesic dose–response curve for dexmedetomidine approximately twofold and reduced the maximal effect (fig. 1B).
Fig. 1. Dose–response relation for the hypnotic and analgesic actions of dexmedetomidine in rats treated with sham surgery (open circles) or chronically with dexmedetomidine (closed squares). (A  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine, and the duration of loss of righting reflex was recorded. P  < 0.0001 by means of two-way analysis of variance. All values are mean ± standard error of 4–11 rats. (B  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine 30 min before analgesia testing. All values are mean ± standard error of 5–14 rats. ** P  < 0.01, * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–14 rats. ip = intraperitoneal.
Fig. 1. Dose–response relation for the hypnotic and analgesic actions of dexmedetomidine in rats treated with sham surgery (open circles) or chronically with dexmedetomidine (closed squares). (A 
	) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine, and the duration of loss of righting reflex was recorded. P 
	< 0.0001 by means of two-way analysis of variance. All values are mean ± standard error of 4–11 rats. (B 
	) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine 30 min before analgesia testing. All values are mean ± standard error of 5–14 rats. ** P 
	< 0.01, * P 
	> 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–14 rats. ip = intraperitoneal.
Fig. 1. Dose–response relation for the hypnotic and analgesic actions of dexmedetomidine in rats treated with sham surgery (open circles) or chronically with dexmedetomidine (closed squares). (A  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine, and the duration of loss of righting reflex was recorded. P  < 0.0001 by means of two-way analysis of variance. All values are mean ± standard error of 4–11 rats. (B  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine 30 min before analgesia testing. All values are mean ± standard error of 5–14 rats. ** P  < 0.01, * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–14 rats. ip = intraperitoneal.
×
Prolonged Exposure of a Dexmedetomidine Solution to MK-801 or NO2-arginine Did Not Decrease Its Effectiveness in Causing Loss of Righting Reflex
Premixing of dexmedetomidine with MK-801 or NO2-arginine followed by incubation at 37°C for 14 days to simulate the situation of these drugs being coadministered by one pump did not decrease the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine to cause sleep (fig. 2). This shows that dexmedetomidine remains chemically intact after prolonged exposure to these agents and documents the validity of using a single pump to deliver two drugs in further experiments.
Fig. 2. The sedative effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in drug-naïve rats was not decreased by preincubation of a concentrated solution (6 mg/ml) with MK-801 (4.8 mg/ml) or NO2-arginine (2.5 mg/ml) at 37°C for 14 days. The final concentrations of MK-801 and NO2-arginine were 120 μg/kg and 63 μg/kg, respectively. * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–7 rats.
Fig. 2. The sedative effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in drug-naïve rats was not decreased by preincubation of a concentrated solution (6 mg/ml) with MK-801 (4.8 mg/ml) or NO2-arginine (2.5 mg/ml) at 37°C for 14 days. The final concentrations of MK-801 and NO2-arginine were 120 μg/kg and 63 μg/kg, respectively. * P 
	> 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–7 rats.
Fig. 2. The sedative effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in drug-naïve rats was not decreased by preincubation of a concentrated solution (6 mg/ml) with MK-801 (4.8 mg/ml) or NO2-arginine (2.5 mg/ml) at 37°C for 14 days. The final concentrations of MK-801 and NO2-arginine were 120 μg/kg and 63 μg/kg, respectively. * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–7 rats.
×
Prevention of the Induction of Tolerance to the Hypnotic Effects of Dexmedetomidine with the NMDA Receptor Antagonists MK-801 and Ketamine
Acute administration of MK-801 to drug-naïve animals did not affect sleep time (fig. 3A). When tolerance had developed, acute administration of MK-801 did not affect the expression of tolerance (fig. 3B). Chronic administration of MK-801 had no effect on the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (fig. 3C), but coadministration of MK-801 with dexmedetomidine was able to prevent the development of tolerance (fig. 3D). In this experiment, the osmotic pumps were removed 1 day before behavioral testing.
Fig. 3. (A  ) The effect of acute administration of MK-801 (10–200 μg/kg) on the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from saline, n = 6. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine. * P  < 0.05 different from control saline, n = 6–7. (C  ) Chronic administration of MK-801 did not affect the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (D  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (4 and 16 μg · kg−1· h−1) blocked tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 3. (A 
	) The effect of acute administration of MK-801 (10–200 μg/kg) on the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from saline, n = 6. (B 
	) Acute administration of MK-801 did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine. * P 
	< 0.05 different from control saline, n = 6–7. (C 
	) Chronic administration of MK-801 did not affect the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (D 
	) Coadministration of MK-801 (4 and 16 μg · kg−1· h−1) blocked tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from control, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 3. (A  ) The effect of acute administration of MK-801 (10–200 μg/kg) on the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from saline, n = 6. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine. * P  < 0.05 different from control saline, n = 6–7. (C  ) Chronic administration of MK-801 did not affect the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (D  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (4 and 16 μg · kg−1· h−1) blocked tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
×
Ketamine had a similar profile in that when acutely administered, it did not affect the sleep time caused by acute injection of dexmedetomidine (fig. 4A). Acute administration of 10 or 20 mg/kg ketamine could not reverse tolerance that was previously established (fig. 4B), but ketamine reversed tolerance to the sedative actions of dexmedetomidine when administered concurrently (fig. 4C). This same dose of ketamine had no effect by itself. In this experiment, the Alzet pumps were left in place for behavioral testing.
Fig. 4. (A  ) Acute administration of ketamine had no effect on the sleep time induced by dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (B  ) Acute administration of ketamine (10 and 20 mg/kg) did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (200 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from 10 mg/kg ketamine to sham- treated animals, *** P  < 0.001 different from 20 mg/kg ketamine to sham-treated animals. (C  ) Coadministration of ketamine (400 μg · kg−1· h−1) reversed tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) without affecting dexmedetomidine sedation when administered alone. P  < 0.05 significantly different from sham, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 4. (A 
	) Acute administration of ketamine had no effect on the sleep time induced by dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (B 
	) Acute administration of ketamine (10 and 20 mg/kg) did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (200 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from 10 mg/kg ketamine to sham- treated animals, *** P 
	< 0.001 different from 20 mg/kg ketamine to sham-treated animals. (C 
	) Coadministration of ketamine (400 μg · kg−1· h−1) reversed tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) without affecting dexmedetomidine sedation when administered alone. P 
	< 0.05 significantly different from sham, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 4. (A  ) Acute administration of ketamine had no effect on the sleep time induced by dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (B  ) Acute administration of ketamine (10 and 20 mg/kg) did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (200 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from 10 mg/kg ketamine to sham- treated animals, *** P  < 0.001 different from 20 mg/kg ketamine to sham-treated animals. (C  ) Coadministration of ketamine (400 μg · kg−1· h−1) reversed tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) without affecting dexmedetomidine sedation when administered alone. P  < 0.05 significantly different from sham, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
×
Prevention of the Induction of Tolerance to the Hypnotic Effects of Dexmedetomidine with an NO Synthase Inhibitor
When administered to drug-naïve animals, NO2-arginine increased sleep time only at high doses (fig. 5A). When tolerance had developed by 7-day administration of dexmedetomidine, acute administration of low doses of NO2-arginine that did not affect sleep time in drug-naïve animals did not reverse its expression (fig. 5B). When NO2-arginine was coadministered with dexmedetomidine, the induction of tolerance to the hypnotic effects of dexmedetomidine was attenuated (fig. 5C). Treatment with 1.25 μg · kg−1· h−1NO2-arginine only (last column) did not affect dexmedetomidine sleep time.
Fig. 5. (A  ) The NO2-arginine dose dependently increased the dexmedetomidine (Dex)-induced sleep time of drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.01, n = 8. (B  ) Acute administration of a dose of NO2-arginine that did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time did not reverse the tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg). * P  < 0.05 different from control, n = 8. (C  ) Concurrent administration of NO2-arginine (0.4–4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days dose-dependently blocked the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, #P  < 0.05 different from both control and dexmedetomidine tolerant group, n = 7–8. Treatment with only NO2-arginine (1.25 μg · kg−1· h−1; last column) did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. N = 8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 5. (A 
	) The NO2-arginine dose dependently increased the dexmedetomidine (Dex)-induced sleep time of drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.01, n = 8. (B 
	) Acute administration of a dose of NO2-arginine that did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time did not reverse the tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg). * P 
	< 0.05 different from control, n = 8. (C 
	) Concurrent administration of NO2-arginine (0.4–4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days dose-dependently blocked the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from control, #P 
	< 0.05 different from both control and dexmedetomidine tolerant group, n = 7–8. Treatment with only NO2-arginine (1.25 μg · kg−1· h−1; last column) did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. N = 8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 5. (A  ) The NO2-arginine dose dependently increased the dexmedetomidine (Dex)-induced sleep time of drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.01, n = 8. (B  ) Acute administration of a dose of NO2-arginine that did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time did not reverse the tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg). * P  < 0.05 different from control, n = 8. (C  ) Concurrent administration of NO2-arginine (0.4–4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days dose-dependently blocked the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, #P  < 0.05 different from both control and dexmedetomidine tolerant group, n = 7–8. Treatment with only NO2-arginine (1.25 μg · kg−1· h−1; last column) did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. N = 8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
×
Lack of Prevention of the Induction of Tolerance to the Analgesic Effects of Dexmedetomidine with MK-801
Acute administration of MK-801 15 min before the challenge dose of dexmedetomidine suppressed its analgesic action at the two highest doses (fig. 6A). To determine whether MK-801 could affect the expression of tolerance, it was acutely administered to control and tolerant animals. A low dose of MK-801 that alone did not have any affect on dexmedetomidine-induced analgesia did not reverse the expression of tolerance (fig. 6B). A higher dose of MK-801 (400 μg/kg) that antagonized the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine in control animals was also unable to reverse tolerance. Coadministration of a dose of MK-801 that prevented the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine and was the maximum dose tolerated by the rat had no effect on the development of analgesic tolerance (fig. 6C). This dose of MK-801 had no effect on tail-flick latency when administered alone (data not shown).
Fig. 6. (A  ) The effect of acute MK-801 on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. MK-801 was administered 15 min before the administration of 50 μg/kg dexmedetomidine, and the tail-flick test was performed 40 min later. ** P  < 0.01, n = 6–7. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 could not prevent the development of tolerance. In rats rendered tolerant by implantation of minipumps that delivered dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days, MK-801 (50 μg/kg) did not prevent the expression of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 was chosen because it had no effect on dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. *** P  < 0.001, n = 6–7. (C  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (0.4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days did not prevent the development of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 alone did not affect the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), *** P  < 0.001 significantly different from control. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats.
Fig. 6. (A 
	) The effect of acute MK-801 on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. MK-801 was administered 15 min before the administration of 50 μg/kg dexmedetomidine, and the tail-flick test was performed 40 min later. ** P 
	< 0.01, n = 6–7. (B 
	) Acute administration of MK-801 could not prevent the development of tolerance. In rats rendered tolerant by implantation of minipumps that delivered dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days, MK-801 (50 μg/kg) did not prevent the expression of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 was chosen because it had no effect on dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. *** P 
	< 0.001, n = 6–7. (C 
	) Coadministration of MK-801 (0.4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days did not prevent the development of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 alone did not affect the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), *** P 
	< 0.001 significantly different from control. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats.
Fig. 6. (A  ) The effect of acute MK-801 on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. MK-801 was administered 15 min before the administration of 50 μg/kg dexmedetomidine, and the tail-flick test was performed 40 min later. ** P  < 0.01, n = 6–7. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 could not prevent the development of tolerance. In rats rendered tolerant by implantation of minipumps that delivered dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days, MK-801 (50 μg/kg) did not prevent the expression of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 was chosen because it had no effect on dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. *** P  < 0.001, n = 6–7. (C  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (0.4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days did not prevent the development of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 alone did not affect the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), *** P  < 0.001 significantly different from control. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats.
×
Lack of Prevention of the Induction of Tolerance to the Analgesic Effects of Dexmedetomidine with NO2-arginine
Acute administration of NO2-arginine did not affect the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally;fig. 7A). To determine whether NO2-arginine could affect the expression of tolerance, it was acutely administered to control and tolerant animals. NO2-arginine (1 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) did not reverse the expression of tolerance (fig. 7B). Coadministration of a dose of 4 μg · kg−1· h−1NO2-arginine, a dose that prevented the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine, had no effect on dexmedetomidine-induced analgesia in control animals and had no effect on analgesic tolerance (fig. 7C). This dose of NO2-arginine had no effect on tail-flick latency when administered alone (data not shown). Increasing the dose of NO2-arginine further to 8 μg · kg−1· h−1was also ineffective in reversing tolerance.
Fig. 7. (A  ) Acute administration of NO2-arginine had no effect on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered intraperitoneally 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), and the tail-flick test was administered 40 min later. All values are mean ± standard error of 6 rats. (B  ) NO2-arginine (1 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) did not reverse dexmedetomidine tolerance to the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in dexmedetomidine-tolerant rats. * P  < 0.05 significantly different from control, N = 7–8. (C  ) Coadministration of a dose of NO2-arginine (4 μg · kg−1· h−1) that effectively antagonized hypnotic tolerance (fig. 5C) had no effect on analgesic tolerance produced by dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1for 14 days). Increasing the dose of NO2-arginine to 8 μg · kg−1· h−1was also ineffective. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. * P  < 0.05, ** P  < 0.01 significantly different from control.
Fig. 7. (A 
	) Acute administration of NO2-arginine had no effect on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered intraperitoneally 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), and the tail-flick test was administered 40 min later. All values are mean ± standard error of 6 rats. (B 
	) NO2-arginine (1 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) did not reverse dexmedetomidine tolerance to the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in dexmedetomidine-tolerant rats. * P 
	< 0.05 significantly different from control, N = 7–8. (C 
	) Coadministration of a dose of NO2-arginine (4 μg · kg−1· h−1) that effectively antagonized hypnotic tolerance (fig. 5C) had no effect on analgesic tolerance produced by dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1for 14 days). Increasing the dose of NO2-arginine to 8 μg · kg−1· h−1was also ineffective. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. * P 
	< 0.05, ** P 
	< 0.01 significantly different from control.
Fig. 7. (A  ) Acute administration of NO2-arginine had no effect on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered intraperitoneally 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), and the tail-flick test was administered 40 min later. All values are mean ± standard error of 6 rats. (B  ) NO2-arginine (1 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) did not reverse dexmedetomidine tolerance to the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in dexmedetomidine-tolerant rats. * P  < 0.05 significantly different from control, N = 7–8. (C  ) Coadministration of a dose of NO2-arginine (4 μg · kg−1· h−1) that effectively antagonized hypnotic tolerance (fig. 5C) had no effect on analgesic tolerance produced by dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1for 14 days). Increasing the dose of NO2-arginine to 8 μg · kg−1· h−1was also ineffective. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. * P  < 0.05, ** P  < 0.01 significantly different from control.
×
Discussion
This study shows that although NMDA receptors and NOS have a role in the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine, they do not seem to play a significant role in the development of analgesic tolerance. Neither NMDA receptor nor NOS inhibitors can affect the expression of hypnotic and analgesic tolerance. This indicates that there are likely multiple mechanisms by which behavioral tolerance to α2agonists is achieved. We have previously shown that acute administration of the L-type Ca2+channel antagonist nifedipine normalized the hypnotic response to dexmedetomidine in the α2-tolerant rats, but coadministration was ineffective in preventing the induction of this tolerance. 31 
Our previous work has elucidated key sites for the intracellular signaling of the hypnotic and analgesic action of α2agonists. The locus ceruleus (LC) seems to be a pivotal site for producing α2-agonist–induced hypnosis. 32 However, the analgesic effects of α2agonists are mediated spinally, supraspinally, and peripherally. 6,33,34 The analgesic action of dexmedetomidine injected directly into the LC results in activation of α2adrenoceptors in the spinal cord because this analgesia can be blocked by intrathecal injection of the α2antagonist atipamezole and also by intrathecal administration of pertussis toxin, 6 which ribosylates and thereby inactivates defined species of G proteins. Intrathecal administration of α2agonists, such as clonidine 35,36 or dexmedetomidine, 6,37 also produce analgesia. These data suggest that spinal α2adrenoceptors are a final common pathway in antinociception.
A possible reason for the differences in the development of tolerance for the two behavioral responses may be the fact that the anatomic sites at which the responses are transduced are not the same. Biochemical changes associated with the hypnotic tolerant state have been found in the LC. Our previous studies of the LC 38 showed that tolerance to the hypnotic response was associated with changes in α2adrenoceptor affinity, ribosylation of guanine nucleotide regulatory proteins (G proteins) ex vivo  , and a decreased sensitivity of forskolin-stimulated adenylyl cyclase to inhibition by dexmedetomidine. Although we assume that tolerance is dependent on these changes, they have not been established definitively. The fact that compared with hypnotic tolerance, analgesic tolerance is achieved only with extended administration of high doses of dexmedetomidine and has different pharmacology may be because of the multiple sites of analgesic action. Therefore, although supraspinally mediated processes may be attenuated, the signaling may still be intact at analgesic sites in the spinal cord and periphery.
We have characterized some of the biochemical changes associated with tolerance in the LC, but we have not yet characterized what transpires in the spinal cord, the final common pathway for analgesic mechanism. Profound tolerance to the analgesic action of intrathecally administered dexmedetomidine has been shown, 39 indicating that changes in spinal cord play a role in analgesic tolerance. A full understanding of the process underlying α2analgesic tolerance will depend on a more detailed study of the biochemical processes involved.
The α2adrenoceptor system is thought to have many similarities with the opioid receptor system based on their similarities in physiologic actions in the LC 40,41 and spinal cord 42,43 and in their actions on nociceptive processing in the spinal cord. 44,45 Experimental findings from models of opioid tolerance were initially hypothesized to be directly relevant to the situation with the α2adrenoceptor. However, in contrast to α2analgesic tolerance, development of opioid analgesic tolerance is sensitive to NMDA receptor antagonists 20–23 and NOS inhibitors. 24,25,46 Opioid tolerance develops, at least in part, at the spinal level because spinal administration of morphine is reversed by coadministration of MK-801 47,48 and with the presumably selective neuronal NOS inhibitor, 7-nitroindazole. 48 The lack of effect of NMDA and NOS inhibitors in α2analgesic tolerance indicates that the mechanisms underlying α2and opioid tolerance are likely different. This could explain why in some studies, no analgesic cross-tolerance between opioid and α2agonists was found, 49,50 although cross-tolerance for opioid and α2agonists has been observed for peripheral antinociception. 51 Others have found evidence that even in a cell culture system in which both opioids and α2agonists inhibit cAMP production, opioid and α2tolerance do not share common pathways. 27 Therefore, even two drug classes apparently sharing a common second messenger system may have different mechanisms of tolerance.
Data from these studies with the pharmacologic probes (MK-801, ketamine, and NO2-arginine) strongly suggest that tolerance has at least two distinct phases (induction and expression) as is seen in other forms of synaptic plasticity (e.g.  , long-term potentiation), and that the components of the signaling pathway follow in an orderly temporal sequence. The fact that the efficacy of α2agonists may decrease over time and be differentially affected by coadministration of other classes of drugs may also have clinical ramifications for intensive care unit sedation.
The authors thank the Medical Research Council, London, United Kingdom, and the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
References
Uhde TW, Stein MB, Vittone BJ, Siever LJ, Boulenger JP, Klein E, Mellman TA: Behavioral and physiologic effects of short-term and long-term administration of clonidine in panic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1989; 46: 170–7Uhde, TW Stein, MB Vittone, BJ Siever, LJ Boulenger, JP Klein, E Mellman, TA
Flacke JW, Bloor BC, Flacke WE, Wong D, Dazza S, Stead SW, Laks H: Reduced narcotic requirement by clonidine with improved hemodynamic and adrenergic stability in patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery. A nesthesiology 1987; 67: 11–9Flacke, JW Bloor, BC Flacke, WE Wong, D Dazza, S Stead, SW Laks, H
Aho M, Lehtinen AM, Erkola O, Kallio A, Korttila K: The effect of intravenously administered dexmedetomidine on perioperative hemodynamics and isoflurane requirements in patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy. A nesthesiology 1991; 74: 997–1002Aho, M Lehtinen, AM Erkola, O Kallio, A Korttila, K
Ghignone M, Quintin L, Duke PC, Kehler CH, Calvillo O: Effects of clonidine on narcotic requirements and hemodynamic response during induction of fentanyl anesthesia and endotracheal intubation. A nesthesiology 1986; 64: 36–42Ghignone, M Quintin, L Duke, PC Kehler, CH Calvillo, O
Aantaa R, Kanto J, Scheinin M, Kallio A, Scheinin H: Dexmedetomidine, an α2-adrenoceptor agonist, reduces anesthetic requirements for patients undergoing minor gynecologic surgery. A nesthesiology 1990; 73: 230–5Aantaa, R Kanto, J Scheinin, M Kallio, A Scheinin, H
Guo TZ, Jiang JY, Buttermann AE, Maze M: Dexmedetomidine injection into the locus ceruleus produces antinociception. A nesthesiology 1996; 84: 873–81Guo, TZ Jiang, JY Buttermann, AE Maze, M
Eisenach J, Detweiler D, Hood D: Hemodynamic and analgesic actions of epidurally administered clonidine. A nesthesiology 1993; 78: 277–87Eisenach, J Detweiler, D Hood, D
Jarvis DA, Duncan SR, Segal IS, Maze M: Ventilatory effects of clonidine alone and in the presence of alfentanil, in human volunteers. A nesthesiology 1992; 76: 899–905Jarvis, DA Duncan, SR Segal, IS Maze, M
Bonnet F, Boico O, Rostaing S, Saada M, Loriferne JF, Touboul C, Abhay K, Ghignone M: Postoperative analgesia with extradural clonidine. Br J Anaesth 1989; 63: 465–9Bonnet, F Boico, O Rostaing, S Saada, M Loriferne, JF Touboul, C Abhay, K Ghignone, M
Eisenach JC, Lysak SZ, Viscomi CM: Epidural clonidine analgesia following surgery: Phase I. A nesthesiology 1989; 71: 640–6Eisenach, JC Lysak, SZ Viscomi, CM
Filos KS, Goudas LC, Patroni O, Polyzou V: Intrathecal clonidine as a sole analgesic for pain relief after cesarean section. A nesthesiology 1992; 77: 267–74Filos, KS Goudas, LC Patroni, O Polyzou, V
Eisenach JC, Rauck RL, Buzzanell C, Lysak SZ: Epidural clonidine analgesia for intractable cancer pain: Phase I. A nesthesiology 1989; 71: 647–52Eisenach, JC Rauck, RL Buzzanell, C Lysak, SZ
Eisenach JC, De Kock M, Klimscha W:α2Adrenergic agonists for regional anesthesia: A clinical review of clonidine (1984–1995). A nesthesiology 1996; 85: 655–74Eisenach, JC De Kock, M Klimscha, W
Segal IS, Jarvis DJ, Duncan SR, White PF, Maze M: Clinical efficacy of oral-transdermal clonidine combinations during the perioperative period. A nesthesiology 1991; 74: 220–5Segal, IS Jarvis, DJ Duncan, SR White, PF Maze, M
Maze M: Redefining sedation, International Congress and Symposium. Edited by Maze M, Morrison P. London, The Royal Society of Medicine Press, 1998, pp 3–11
Asztely F, Gustafsson B: Ionotropic glutamate receptors: Their possible role in the expression of hippocampal synaptic plasticity. Mol Neurobiol 1996; 12: 1–11Asztely, F Gustafsson, B
Meller ST, Gebhart GF: Spinal mediators of hyperalgesia. Drugs 1994; 47: 10–20Meller, ST Gebhart, GF
Malen PL, Chapman PF: Nitric oxide facilitates long-term potentiation, but not long-term depression. J Neurosci 1997; 17: 2645–51Malen, PL Chapman, PF
Boxall AR, Garthwaite J: Long-term depression in rat cerebellum requires both NO synthase and NO-sensitive guanylyl cyclase. Eur J Neurosci 1996; 8: 2209–12Boxall, AR Garthwaite, J
Marek P, Ben-Eliyahu S, Vaccarino AL, Liebeskind JC: Delayed application of MK-801 attenuates development of morphine tolerance in rats. Brain Res 1991; 558: 163–5Marek, P Ben-Eliyahu, S Vaccarino, AL Liebeskind, JC
Ben-Eliyahu S, Marek P, Vaccarino AL, Mogil JS, Sternberg WF, Liebeskind JC: The NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 prevents long-lasting non-associative morphine tolerance in the rat. Brain Res 1992; 575: 304–8Ben-Eliyahu, S Marek, P Vaccarino, AL Mogil, JS Sternberg, WF Liebeskind, JC
Tiseo PJ, Inturrisi CE: Attenuation and reversal of morphine tolerance by the competitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, LY274614. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1993; 264: 1090–6Tiseo, PJ Inturrisi, CE
Trujillo KA, Akil H: Inhibition of morphine tolerance and dependence by the NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801. Science 1991; 251: 85–7Trujillo, KA Akil, H
Kumar S, Bhargava HN: Time course of the changes in central nitric oxide synthase activity following chronic treatment with morphine in the mouse: Reversal by naltrexone. Gen Pharmacol 1997; 29: 223–7Kumar, S Bhargava, HN
Highfield DA, Grant S: Nω-nitro-L-arginine, an NOS inhibitor, reduces tolerance to morphine in the rat locus coeruleus. Synapse 1998; 29: 233–9Highfield, DA Grant, S
Lee S, Rosenberg CR, Musacchio JM: Cross-dependence to opioid and alpha 2-adrenergic receptor agonists in NG108-15 cells. Faseb J 1988; 2: 52–5Lee, S Rosenberg, CR Musacchio, JM
Lameh J, Eiger S, Sadee W: Interaction among μ-opioid receptors and α2-adrenoceptors on SH- SY5Y human neuroblastoma cells. Eur J Pharmacol 1992; 227: 19–24Lameh, J Eiger, S Sadee, W
Hayashi Y, Guo TZ, Maze M: Desensitization to the behavioral effects of α2-adrenergic agonists in rats. A nesthesiology 1995; 82: 954–62Hayashi, Y Guo, TZ Maze, M
Reid K, Hayashi Y, Guo T-Z, Correa-Sales C, Nacif-Coelho C, Maze M: Chronic administration of an α2adrenergic agonist desensitizes rats to the anesthetic effects of dexmedetomidine. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1994; 47: 171–5Reid, K Hayashi, Y Guo, T-Z Correa-Sales, C Nacif-Coelho, C Maze, M
Guo TZ, Tinklenberg J, Oliker R, Maze M: Central α1-adrenoceptor stimulation functionally antagonizes the hypnotic response to dexmedetomidine, an α2-adrenoceptor agonist. A nesthesiology 1991; 75: 252–6Guo, TZ Tinklenberg, J Oliker, R Maze, M
Reid K, Guo TZ, Davies MF, Maze M: Nifedipine, an L-type calcium channel blocker, restores the hypnotic response in rats made tolerant to the alpha-2 adrenergic agonist dexmedetomidine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1997; 283: 993–9Reid, K Guo, TZ Davies, MF Maze, M
Correa-Sales C, Rabin BC, Maze M: A hypnotic response to dexmedetomidine, an α2agonist is mediated in the locus coeruleus in rats. A nesthesiology 1992; 76: 948–52Correa-Sales, C Rabin, BC Maze, M
Khasar SG, Green PG, Chou B, Levine JD: Peripheral nociceptive effects of α2adrenergic receptor agonists in the rat. Neuroscience 1995; 66: 427–32Khasar, SG Green, PG Chou, B Levine, JD
Poree LR, Guo TZ, Kingery WS, Maze M: The analgesic potency of dexmedetomidine is enhanced after nerve injury: A possible role for peripheral α2-adrenoceptors. Anesth Analg 1998; 87: 941–8Poree, LR Guo, TZ Kingery, WS Maze, M
Post C, Gordh T Jr, Minor BG, Archer T, Freedman J: Antinociceptive effects and spinal cord tissue concentrations after intrathecal injection of guanfacine or clonidine into rats. Anesth Analg 1987; 66: 317–24Post, C Gordh, T Minor, BG Archer, T Freedman, J
Ossipov MH, Harris S, Lloyd P, Messineo E: An isobolographic analysis of the antinociceptive effect of systemically and intrathecally administered combinations of clonidine and opiates. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1990; 255: 1107–16Ossipov, MH Harris, S Lloyd, P Messineo, E
Fisher B, Zornow MH, Yaksh TL, Peterson BM: Antinociceptive properties of intrathecal dexmedetomidine in rats. Eur J Pharmacol 1991; 192: 221–5Fisher, B Zornow, MH Yaksh, TL Peterson, BM
Reid K, Hayashi Y, Hsu J, Maguire PA, Rabin BC, Guo T-Z, Maze M: Chronic administration of dexmedetomidine decreases α2-adrenergic signal transduction. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1997; 57: 63–71Reid, K Hayashi, Y Hsu, J Maguire, PA Rabin, BC Guo, T-Z Maze, M
Takano Y, Yaksh TL: Chronic spinal infusion of dexmedetomidine, ST-91 and clonidine: spinal alpha 2 adrenoceptor subtypes and intrinsic activity. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1993; 264: 327–35Takano, Y Yaksh, TL
Aghajanian GK, Wang YY: Common alpha 2- and opiate effector mechanisms in the locus coeruleus: Intracellular studies in brain slices. Neuropharmacology 1987; 26: 793–9Aghajanian, GK Wang, YY
Williams JT, North RA, Tokimasa T: Inward rectification of resting and opiate-activated potassium currents in rat locus coeruleus neurons. J Neurosci 1988; 8: 4299–306Williams, JT North, RA Tokimasa, T
Yoshimura M, North RA: Substantia gelatinosa neurones hyperpolarized in vitro by enkephalin. Nature 1983; 305: 529–30Yoshimura, M North, RA
North RA, Yoshimura M: The actions of noradrenaline on neurones of the rat substantia gelatinosa in vitro. J Physiol (Lond) 1984; 349: 43–55North, RA Yoshimura, M
Kendig JJ, Savola MK, Woodley SJ, Maze M:α2-Adrenoceptors inhibit a nociceptive response in neonatal rat spinal cord. Eur J Pharmacol 1991; 192: 293–300Kendig, JJ Savola, MK Woodley, SJ Maze, M
Feng J, Kendig JJ: The NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 differentially modulates mu and kappa opioid actions in spinal cord in vitro. Pain 1996; 66: 343–9Feng, J Kendig, JJ
Bhargava HN: Nitric oxide synthase inhibition blocks tolerance to the analgesic action of kappa-opiate receptor agonist in the rat. Pharmacology 1994; 48: 234–41Bhargava, HN
Dunbar S, Yaksh TL: Concurrent spinal infusion of MK801 blocks spinal tolerance and dependence induced by chronic intrathecal morphine in the rat. A nesthesiology 1996; 84: 1177–88Dunbar, S Yaksh, TL
Fairbanks CA, Wilcox GL: Acute tolerance to spinally administered morphine compares mechanistically with chronically induced morphine tolerance. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1997; 282: 1408–17Fairbanks, CA Wilcox, GL
Hayashi Y, Guo TZ, Maze M: Hypnotic and analgesic effects of the α2adrenergic agonist dexmedetomidine in morphine-tolerant rats. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 606–10Hayashi, Y Guo, TZ Maze, M
Ossipov MH, Suarez LJ, Spaulding TC: Antinociceptive interactions between alpha 2-adrenergic and opiate agonists at the spinal level in rodents. Anesth Analg 1989; 68: 194–200Ossipov, MH Suarez, LJ Spaulding, TC
Aley KO, Levine JD: Multiple receptors Involved in peripheral α2, μ, and A1antinociception, tolerance, and withdrawal. J Neurosci 1997; 17: 735–44Aley, KO Levine, JD
Fig. 1. Dose–response relation for the hypnotic and analgesic actions of dexmedetomidine in rats treated with sham surgery (open circles) or chronically with dexmedetomidine (closed squares). (A  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine, and the duration of loss of righting reflex was recorded. P  < 0.0001 by means of two-way analysis of variance. All values are mean ± standard error of 4–11 rats. (B  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine 30 min before analgesia testing. All values are mean ± standard error of 5–14 rats. ** P  < 0.01, * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–14 rats. ip = intraperitoneal.
Fig. 1. Dose–response relation for the hypnotic and analgesic actions of dexmedetomidine in rats treated with sham surgery (open circles) or chronically with dexmedetomidine (closed squares). (A 
	) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine, and the duration of loss of righting reflex was recorded. P 
	< 0.0001 by means of two-way analysis of variance. All values are mean ± standard error of 4–11 rats. (B 
	) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine 30 min before analgesia testing. All values are mean ± standard error of 5–14 rats. ** P 
	< 0.01, * P 
	> 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–14 rats. ip = intraperitoneal.
Fig. 1. Dose–response relation for the hypnotic and analgesic actions of dexmedetomidine in rats treated with sham surgery (open circles) or chronically with dexmedetomidine (closed squares). (A  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine, and the duration of loss of righting reflex was recorded. P  < 0.0001 by means of two-way analysis of variance. All values are mean ± standard error of 4–11 rats. (B  ) Rats were given dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days and then were injected with challenge doses of dexmedetomidine 30 min before analgesia testing. All values are mean ± standard error of 5–14 rats. ** P  < 0.01, * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–14 rats. ip = intraperitoneal.
×
Fig. 2. The sedative effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in drug-naïve rats was not decreased by preincubation of a concentrated solution (6 mg/ml) with MK-801 (4.8 mg/ml) or NO2-arginine (2.5 mg/ml) at 37°C for 14 days. The final concentrations of MK-801 and NO2-arginine were 120 μg/kg and 63 μg/kg, respectively. * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–7 rats.
Fig. 2. The sedative effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in drug-naïve rats was not decreased by preincubation of a concentrated solution (6 mg/ml) with MK-801 (4.8 mg/ml) or NO2-arginine (2.5 mg/ml) at 37°C for 14 days. The final concentrations of MK-801 and NO2-arginine were 120 μg/kg and 63 μg/kg, respectively. * P 
	> 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–7 rats.
Fig. 2. The sedative effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in drug-naïve rats was not decreased by preincubation of a concentrated solution (6 mg/ml) with MK-801 (4.8 mg/ml) or NO2-arginine (2.5 mg/ml) at 37°C for 14 days. The final concentrations of MK-801 and NO2-arginine were 120 μg/kg and 63 μg/kg, respectively. * P  > 0.05. All values are mean ± standard error of 6–7 rats.
×
Fig. 3. (A  ) The effect of acute administration of MK-801 (10–200 μg/kg) on the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from saline, n = 6. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine. * P  < 0.05 different from control saline, n = 6–7. (C  ) Chronic administration of MK-801 did not affect the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (D  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (4 and 16 μg · kg−1· h−1) blocked tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 3. (A 
	) The effect of acute administration of MK-801 (10–200 μg/kg) on the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from saline, n = 6. (B 
	) Acute administration of MK-801 did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine. * P 
	< 0.05 different from control saline, n = 6–7. (C 
	) Chronic administration of MK-801 did not affect the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (D 
	) Coadministration of MK-801 (4 and 16 μg · kg−1· h−1) blocked tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from control, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 3. (A  ) The effect of acute administration of MK-801 (10–200 μg/kg) on the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (Dex; 100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from saline, n = 6. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine. * P  < 0.05 different from control saline, n = 6–7. (C  ) Chronic administration of MK-801 did not affect the sleep time induced by acute administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (D  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (4 and 16 μg · kg−1· h−1) blocked tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
×
Fig. 4. (A  ) Acute administration of ketamine had no effect on the sleep time induced by dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (B  ) Acute administration of ketamine (10 and 20 mg/kg) did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (200 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from 10 mg/kg ketamine to sham- treated animals, *** P  < 0.001 different from 20 mg/kg ketamine to sham-treated animals. (C  ) Coadministration of ketamine (400 μg · kg−1· h−1) reversed tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) without affecting dexmedetomidine sedation when administered alone. P  < 0.05 significantly different from sham, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 4. (A 
	) Acute administration of ketamine had no effect on the sleep time induced by dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (B 
	) Acute administration of ketamine (10 and 20 mg/kg) did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (200 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from 10 mg/kg ketamine to sham- treated animals, *** P 
	< 0.001 different from 20 mg/kg ketamine to sham-treated animals. (C 
	) Coadministration of ketamine (400 μg · kg−1· h−1) reversed tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) without affecting dexmedetomidine sedation when administered alone. P 
	< 0.05 significantly different from sham, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 4. (A  ) Acute administration of ketamine had no effect on the sleep time induced by dexmedetomidine (Dex; 150 μg/kg intraperitoneally). (B  ) Acute administration of ketamine (10 and 20 mg/kg) did not block dexmedetomidine-induced tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (200 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from 10 mg/kg ketamine to sham- treated animals, *** P  < 0.001 different from 20 mg/kg ketamine to sham-treated animals. (C  ) Coadministration of ketamine (400 μg · kg−1· h−1) reversed tolerance to the hypnotic effects of a challenge dose of dexmedetomidine (150 μg/kg intraperitoneally) without affecting dexmedetomidine sedation when administered alone. P  < 0.05 significantly different from sham, N = 6–8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
×
Fig. 5. (A  ) The NO2-arginine dose dependently increased the dexmedetomidine (Dex)-induced sleep time of drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.01, n = 8. (B  ) Acute administration of a dose of NO2-arginine that did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time did not reverse the tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg). * P  < 0.05 different from control, n = 8. (C  ) Concurrent administration of NO2-arginine (0.4–4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days dose-dependently blocked the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, #P  < 0.05 different from both control and dexmedetomidine tolerant group, n = 7–8. Treatment with only NO2-arginine (1.25 μg · kg−1· h−1; last column) did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. N = 8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 5. (A 
	) The NO2-arginine dose dependently increased the dexmedetomidine (Dex)-induced sleep time of drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.01, n = 8. (B 
	) Acute administration of a dose of NO2-arginine that did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time did not reverse the tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg). * P 
	< 0.05 different from control, n = 8. (C 
	) Concurrent administration of NO2-arginine (0.4–4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days dose-dependently blocked the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P 
	< 0.05 different from control, #P 
	< 0.05 different from both control and dexmedetomidine tolerant group, n = 7–8. Treatment with only NO2-arginine (1.25 μg · kg−1· h−1; last column) did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. N = 8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
Fig. 5. (A  ) The NO2-arginine dose dependently increased the dexmedetomidine (Dex)-induced sleep time of drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.01, n = 8. (B  ) Acute administration of a dose of NO2-arginine that did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time did not reverse the tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg). * P  < 0.05 different from control, n = 8. (C  ) Concurrent administration of NO2-arginine (0.4–4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (5 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 7 days dose-dependently blocked the development of tolerance to the hypnotic effect of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally). * P  < 0.05 different from control, #P  < 0.05 different from both control and dexmedetomidine tolerant group, n = 7–8. Treatment with only NO2-arginine (1.25 μg · kg−1· h−1; last column) did not affect dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. N = 8. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. LORR = loss of righting reflex.
×
Fig. 6. (A  ) The effect of acute MK-801 on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. MK-801 was administered 15 min before the administration of 50 μg/kg dexmedetomidine, and the tail-flick test was performed 40 min later. ** P  < 0.01, n = 6–7. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 could not prevent the development of tolerance. In rats rendered tolerant by implantation of minipumps that delivered dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days, MK-801 (50 μg/kg) did not prevent the expression of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 was chosen because it had no effect on dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. *** P  < 0.001, n = 6–7. (C  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (0.4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days did not prevent the development of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 alone did not affect the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), *** P  < 0.001 significantly different from control. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats.
Fig. 6. (A 
	) The effect of acute MK-801 on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. MK-801 was administered 15 min before the administration of 50 μg/kg dexmedetomidine, and the tail-flick test was performed 40 min later. ** P 
	< 0.01, n = 6–7. (B 
	) Acute administration of MK-801 could not prevent the development of tolerance. In rats rendered tolerant by implantation of minipumps that delivered dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days, MK-801 (50 μg/kg) did not prevent the expression of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 was chosen because it had no effect on dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. *** P 
	< 0.001, n = 6–7. (C 
	) Coadministration of MK-801 (0.4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days did not prevent the development of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 alone did not affect the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), *** P 
	< 0.001 significantly different from control. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats.
Fig. 6. (A  ) The effect of acute MK-801 on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. MK-801 was administered 15 min before the administration of 50 μg/kg dexmedetomidine, and the tail-flick test was performed 40 min later. ** P  < 0.01, n = 6–7. (B  ) Acute administration of MK-801 could not prevent the development of tolerance. In rats rendered tolerant by implantation of minipumps that delivered dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days, MK-801 (50 μg/kg) did not prevent the expression of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 was chosen because it had no effect on dexmedetomidine-induced sleep time. *** P  < 0.001, n = 6–7. (C  ) Coadministration of MK-801 (0.4 μg · kg−1· h−1) with dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1) for 14 days did not prevent the development of tolerance. This dose of MK-801 alone did not affect the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), *** P  < 0.001 significantly different from control. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats.
×
Fig. 7. (A  ) Acute administration of NO2-arginine had no effect on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered intraperitoneally 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), and the tail-flick test was administered 40 min later. All values are mean ± standard error of 6 rats. (B  ) NO2-arginine (1 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) did not reverse dexmedetomidine tolerance to the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in dexmedetomidine-tolerant rats. * P  < 0.05 significantly different from control, N = 7–8. (C  ) Coadministration of a dose of NO2-arginine (4 μg · kg−1· h−1) that effectively antagonized hypnotic tolerance (fig. 5C) had no effect on analgesic tolerance produced by dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1for 14 days). Increasing the dose of NO2-arginine to 8 μg · kg−1· h−1was also ineffective. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. * P  < 0.05, ** P  < 0.01 significantly different from control.
Fig. 7. (A 
	) Acute administration of NO2-arginine had no effect on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered intraperitoneally 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), and the tail-flick test was administered 40 min later. All values are mean ± standard error of 6 rats. (B 
	) NO2-arginine (1 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) did not reverse dexmedetomidine tolerance to the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in dexmedetomidine-tolerant rats. * P 
	< 0.05 significantly different from control, N = 7–8. (C 
	) Coadministration of a dose of NO2-arginine (4 μg · kg−1· h−1) that effectively antagonized hypnotic tolerance (fig. 5C) had no effect on analgesic tolerance produced by dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1for 14 days). Increasing the dose of NO2-arginine to 8 μg · kg−1· h−1was also ineffective. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. * P 
	< 0.05, ** P 
	< 0.01 significantly different from control.
Fig. 7. (A  ) Acute administration of NO2-arginine had no effect on the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (Dex) in drug-naïve rats. NO2-arginine was administered intraperitoneally 15 min before administration of dexmedetomidine (50 μg/kg intraperitoneally), and the tail-flick test was administered 40 min later. All values are mean ± standard error of 6 rats. (B  ) NO2-arginine (1 and 20 mg/kg intraperitoneally) did not reverse dexmedetomidine tolerance to the analgesic action of dexmedetomidine (100 μg/kg intraperitoneally) in dexmedetomidine-tolerant rats. * P  < 0.05 significantly different from control, N = 7–8. (C  ) Coadministration of a dose of NO2-arginine (4 μg · kg−1· h−1) that effectively antagonized hypnotic tolerance (fig. 5C) had no effect on analgesic tolerance produced by dexmedetomidine (10 μg · kg−1· h−1for 14 days). Increasing the dose of NO2-arginine to 8 μg · kg−1· h−1was also ineffective. All values are mean ± standard error of 7–8 rats. * P  < 0.05, ** P  < 0.01 significantly different from control.
×