Free
Pain Medicine  |   November 2000
Dual Effects of Intravenous Anesthetics on the Function of Norepinephrine Transporters
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Koji Hara, M.D., Ph.D.
    *
  • Nobuyuki Yanagihara, Ph.D.
  • Kouichiro Minami, M.D., Ph.D.
    *
  • Hideyasu Hirano, M.D., Ph.D.
  • Takeyoshi Sata, M.D., Ph.D.
    §
  • Akio Shigematsu, M.D., Ph.D.
  • Futoshi Izumi, M.D., Ph.D.
    #
  • *Research Associate, §Associate Professor, ∥Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, †Professor, Department of Pharmacology, ‡Assistant Professor, Department of Biochemistry, #President.
Article Information
Pain Medicine
Pain Medicine   |   November 2000
Dual Effects of Intravenous Anesthetics on the Function of Norepinephrine Transporters
Anesthesiology 11 2000, Vol.93, 1329-1335. doi:
Anesthesiology 11 2000, Vol.93, 1329-1335. doi:
THE anesthetic action induced by general anesthetics is a complex phenomenon. Its important component appears to be an alteration of synaptic transmission in the central nervous system. 1,2 A large number of recent studies have led to the proposal that actions on postsynaptic neurotransmitter receptors or presynaptic neurotransmitter release account for the dominant central nervous system–depressant effects of anesthetics. 3,4 On the other hand, several lines of evidence have shown that some anesthetics also interact with presynaptic transporters to alter the uptake of neurotransmitters. For example, anesthetics inhibit the uptake of γ-aminobutyric acid, 5 dopamine, 6 and serotonin 7 by rat brain synaptosomes. It is well known that ketamine suppresses the uptake of norepinephrine by sympathetic neurons, 8–10 which may explain its sympathetic stimulation. This evidence suggests that neurotransmitter transporters are also a target site for anesthetics.
Norepinephrine transporters (NETs) located in the presynaptic membranes of noradrenergic nerve terminals mediate the termination of neurotransmission by the reuptake of norepinephrine released into the extracellular milieu. 11 Human NET was the first NET cloned, and its mRNA was localized in the brainstem and adrenal gland. 12 Bönisch’s group cloned bovine adrenal medullary NET and reported that its pharmacologic properties were similar to those of the NET in central and peripheral noradrenergic neurons. 13,14 Bovine NET expression in adrenal medullary cells has been used as a model system to study the effect of drugs on NET in noradrenergic neurons. 15–17 
Recently, we reported that ketamine inhibits [3H]norepinephrine uptake via  an interaction with NET at a site partly overlapping the binding site of desipramine, 17 a selective inhibitor of NET. In the present study, we further examine the effects of other intravenous anesthetics (propofol, thiamylal, and diazepam) on NET in cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells. Comparing present results with those for ketamine, we searched for a putative common site for intravenous anesthetics on the NET. We also studied the effects of long-term treatment with propofol on the [3H]norepinephrine uptake, [3H]desipramine binding, and mRNA level of NET.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Eagle’s minimum essential medium (MEM) was obtained from Nissui Pharmaceuticals (Tokyo, Japan). Fetal calf serum, l-norepinephrine, pargyline hydrochloride, and l-ascorbic acid were obtained from Nacalai Tesque (Kyoto, Japan). Collagenase was obtained from Nitta Zerachin (Osaka, Japan). 2,6-Diisopropylphenol (propofol) was obtained from Tokyo Kasei (Tokyo, Japan). Diazepam hydrochroride was a gift from Takeda Chemical Industries (Osaka, Japan). Thiamylal sodium was obtained from Sankyo Co. (Osaka, Japan). Desipramine hydrochloride was obtained from Sigma (St. Louis, MO), and nisoxetine hydrochloride was obtained from Research Biochemicals International (Natick, MA). l-[7,8-3[3H]Noradrenaline (34.0 Ci/mmol) was obtained from Amersham International (Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom), and [benzene ring, 10,11-[3H]-desmethylimipramine (desipramine) hydrochloride (73.0 Ci/mmol) was obtained from New England Nuclear (Boston, MA). 2,6-Diisopropylphenol was diluted with dimethyl sulfoxide for experiments. Dimethyl sulfoxide at the concentrations used for experiments had no effect on [3H]norepinephrine uptake and [3H]desipramine binding. Thiamylal sodium and diazepam hydrochroride were dissolved with distilled water.
Isolation and Culture of Adrenal Medullary Cells
Adrenal medullary cells were isolated from bovine adrenal medulla as described previously. 18 The cells were plated at 4 × 106cells per dish (Falcon, 35 mm) in Eagle’s MEM containing 10% fetal calf serum, 60 μg/ml aminobenzylpenicillin, 100 μg/ml streptomycin, 0.3 μg/ml amphotericin B, and 3.0 μm cytarabine. 15 The cells were cultured in 5% CO2–95% air at 37°C and used for experiments between 2 and 4 days of culture.
[3H]Norepinephrine Uptake by the Cells
Cultured cells (4 × 106per dish) were incubated at 37°C for 15 min in oxygenated Krebs-Ringer phosphate buffer containing 100 μm pargyline, 100 μm ascorbic acid, and 500 nm [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm), thiamylal (3–1,000 μm), or diazepam (3–1,000 μm). Pargyline is a monoamine oxidase inhibitor that prevents the enzymatic decomposition of norepinephrine in the cells. Ascorbic acid is an antioxidant of norepinephrine. Krebs-Ringer phosphate buffer was composed of 154 mm NaCl, 5.6 mm KCl, 1.1 mm MgSO4, 2.2 mm CaCl2, 0.85 mm NaH2PO4, 2.15 mm Na2HPO4, and 10 mm glucose, adjusted to pH 7.4. For the kinetic analysis of [3H]norepinephrine uptake, the cells were incubated with increasing concentrations (1–30 μm) of [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of 100 μm propofol, thiamylal, or diazepam. After incubation, the cells were rapidly washed four times with 1 ml ice-cold buffer and solubilized in 1 ml Triton X-100 (10%; Nacalai Tesque, Kyoto, Japan). The radioactivity in the solubilized cells was counted by a liquid scintillation counter (LSC-3500E; Aloka, Tokyo, Japan). Nonspecific uptake was determined in the presence of 10 μm desipramine, and specific uptake was obtained by subtracting the nonspecific uptake from the total uptake. The desipramine-sensitive uptake was 92 ± 3% (n = 12) of the total uptake.
[3H]Desipramine Binding to Plasma Membranes
Plasma membranes isolated from bovine adrenal medulla were prepared as described previously. 19 The binding of [3H]desipramine was determined by incubation of membranes (10 μg protein) suspended in buffer B (composition: 135 mm NaCl, 10 mm Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 5 mm KCl, 1 mm MgSO4) for 30 min at 25°C. The incubation medium (final volume, 250 μl) contained [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm), and in some experiments also contained propofol (0.1–300 μm). After incubation, binding was terminated by the addition of 2 ml ice-cold buffer B and rapid filtration of the membrane suspension under vacuum through Whatman GF/C glass fiber filters (Whatman, Maidstone, United Kingdom). The filters were rapidly washed twice with 2 ml ice-cold buffer B and were placed in counting vials containing a scintillation cocktail. The radioactivity was counted in Aloka LSC-3500E. Nonspecific binding was determined in the presence of 10 μm nisoxetine, a selective NET inhibitor, and specific binding was obtained by subtracting the nonspecific binding from the total binding.
Long-term Treatment of Cells with Propofol for [3H]Norepinephrine Uptake
Cells were preincubated with or without propofol (1–30 μm) for 6–24 h. After preincubation, the cells were washed with 2 ml Eagle’s MEM and stood for another 3 h in a culture chamber to completely wash out propofol. The cells were then incubated with [3H]norepinephrine (500 nm) for 15 min, and [3H]norepinephrine uptake by the cells was evaluated as previously described.
Long-term Treatment of Cells with Propofol for [3H]Desipramine Binding
After treatment of cells with 10 μm propofol for 12 h and subsequent washing with 1 ml MEM and standing for 1 h, cells were collected and crashed by a homogenizer (Ultra-Turrax T8; IKA Labortechnik, Staufen, Germany) for 60 s in a lysis buffer (10 mm Tris-HCl [pH 7.4], 2 mm MgCl2, 1 mm dithiothreitol, 1 mm phenylmethylsulphonyl fluoride) and centrifuged at 1,000 g  for 10 min at 4°C. The supernatant was centrifuged at 60,000 g  for 30 min. The final pellet containing plasma membranes was suspended in the binding buffer (50 mm Tris-HCl [pH 7.4], 300 mm NaCl, 5 mm KCl). 16 The protein of isolated plasma membranes was quantified by the method of Lowry et al.  20 The binding of [3H]desipramine was determined by incubation of membranes (100 μg protein) suspended in buffer B for 30 min at 25°C as described previously.
Assay of Norepinephrine Transporter mRNA Expression by Reverse Transcriptase–Polymerase Chain Reaction
Poly(A)+RNA was isolated from control or propofol-treated cells by guanidine hydrochloride, ethanol fractionation, chloroform–isobutanol extraction, and oligo(dT) cellulose column separation as previously described. 21 The first-strand cDNA was synthesized from Poly(A)+RNA using a first-strand cDNA synthesis kit (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Piscaway, NJ). The obtained cDNA was amplified by polymerase chain reaction. Each sample was assayed for NET and β-actin mRNAs using their specific primers. The sense and antisense primers for NET were 5′-CTGACCAGCACCATCAACTGT-3′ and 5′-GTGAAGAGTTTCCGGTGTCGC-3′, and those for β-actin were 5′-TGGAGAAGAGCTATGAGCTGCCTG-3′ and 5′-GTGCCACCAGACAGCACTGTGTTG-3′, respectively. Polymerase chain reaction using primers for NET or β-actin and a Takara Ex Taq kit (Takara, Otsu, Japan) was conducted with an automatic thermal controller (PC-800; Astec, Fukuoka, Japan). The thermocycling conditions were as follows: 28 cycles of 94°C for 1 min, 62°C for 30 s, 72°C for 20 s for NET; and 20 cycles of 94°C for 15 s, 66°C for 15 s, 72°C for 30 s for β-actin. The resultant polymerase chain reaction products were separated by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and visualized by GelStar Nucleic Acid Gel Stain (Takara, Otsu, Japan). Fluorescence intensity of the bands was quantified with a Fuluoroimage Analyzer (BAS 3000; Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan).
Data Analysis
All values are expressed as mean ± SD. Statistical analysis was conducted by one-way analysis of variance followed by a Dunnett t  test for multiple comparisons in figure 1and by paired Student t  test for comparisons of the values of Michaelis constant (K  m), maximal velocity (Vmax), dissociation constant (K  d), and maximal binding (Bmax) in figures 2 and 3and table 1. In figures 4 and 5, analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance followed by a Dunnett t  test, and in figure 6by paired Student t  test for comparisons of the values of Kd and Bmax. In figure 7, one-way analysis of variance followed by a Dunnett t  test was used. Differences were considered as statistically significant at P  less than 0.05.
Fig. 1. Effects of intravenous anesthetics on desipramine-sensitive [3H]norepinephrine uptake. Cultured cells (4 × 106per dish) were incubated at 37°C for 15 min with 500 nm [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm), thiamylal (3–1,000 μm), or diazepam (3–1,000 μm). The results are expressed as a percentage of control values. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 1. Effects of intravenous anesthetics on desipramine-sensitive [3H]norepinephrine uptake. Cultured cells (4 × 106per dish) were incubated at 37°C for 15 min with 500 nm [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm), thiamylal (3–1,000 μm), or diazepam (3–1,000 μm). The results are expressed as a percentage of control values. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 1. Effects of intravenous anesthetics on desipramine-sensitive [3H]norepinephrine uptake. Cultured cells (4 × 106per dish) were incubated at 37°C for 15 min with 500 nm [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm), thiamylal (3–1,000 μm), or diazepam (3–1,000 μm). The results are expressed as a percentage of control values. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Fig. 2. Saturation curve of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Cells were incubated with or without 100 μm propofol, thiamylal, or diazepam, and in the presence of various concentrations (1–30 μm) of [3H]norepinephrine at 37°C for 15 min. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. (B  ) Eadie-Hofstee analysis of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The data were obtained from fig. 2A. V/S = velocity/substrate.
Fig. 2. Saturation curve of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A 
	) Cells were incubated with or without 100 μm propofol, thiamylal, or diazepam, and in the presence of various concentrations (1–30 μm) of [3H]norepinephrine at 37°C for 15 min. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. (B 
	) Eadie-Hofstee analysis of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The data were obtained from fig. 2A. V/S = velocity/substrate.
Fig. 2. Saturation curve of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Cells were incubated with or without 100 μm propofol, thiamylal, or diazepam, and in the presence of various concentrations (1–30 μm) of [3H]norepinephrine at 37°C for 15 min. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. (B  ) Eadie-Hofstee analysis of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The data were obtained from fig. 2A. V/S = velocity/substrate.
×
Fig. 3. Saturation curve of nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding to plasma membranes. (A  ) Plasma membranes (10 μg protein) from bovine adrenal medulla were incubated at 25°C for 30 min with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (60 μm) and in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Nonspecific bindings are expressed as dotted lines in the presence (filled triangles) or absence (open triangles) of propofol. Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated five times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 3A. B/F = bound/free.
Fig. 3. Saturation curve of nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding to plasma membranes. (A 
	) Plasma membranes (10 μg protein) from bovine adrenal medulla were incubated at 25°C for 30 min with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (60 μm) and in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Nonspecific bindings are expressed as dotted lines in the presence (filled triangles) or absence (open triangles) of propofol. Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated five times with essentially equivalent results. (B 
	) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 3A. B/F = bound/free.
Fig. 3. Saturation curve of nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding to plasma membranes. (A  ) Plasma membranes (10 μg protein) from bovine adrenal medulla were incubated at 25°C for 30 min with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (60 μm) and in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Nonspecific bindings are expressed as dotted lines in the presence (filled triangles) or absence (open triangles) of propofol. Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated five times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 3A. B/F = bound/free.
×
Table 1. Effects of Various Intravenous Anesthetics on the Kinetic Parameters for [3H]Norepinephrine Uptake
Image not available
Table 1. Effects of Various Intravenous Anesthetics on the Kinetic Parameters for [3H]Norepinephrine Uptake
×
Fig. 4. Effect of various concentrations of propofol on [3H]desipramine binding. Plasma membranes were incubated with [3H]desipramine (10 nm) at 25°C for 30 min in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm). Control values (0 μm propofol) for specific binding were 2.26 ± 0.11 pmol/mg protein. The results are the means (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 4. Effect of various concentrations of propofol on [3H]desipramine binding. Plasma membranes were incubated with [3H]desipramine (10 nm) at 25°C for 30 min in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm). Control values (0 μm propofol) for specific binding were 2.26 ± 0.11 pmol/mg protein. The results are the means (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 4. Effect of various concentrations of propofol on [3H]desipramine binding. Plasma membranes were incubated with [3H]desipramine (10 nm) at 25°C for 30 min in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm). Control values (0 μm propofol) for specific binding were 2.26 ± 0.11 pmol/mg protein. The results are the means (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Fig. 5. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Time course of preincubation with propofol (1 μm) for [3H]norepinephrine uptake. After preincubation with or without propofol for the period indicated, the cells were cultured for another 3 h in propofol-free medium and then incubated at 37°C for 15 min in the presence of [3H]norepinephrine (500 nm). The values of the control group at 6, 12, and 24 h were 1.3 ± 0.2, 1.2 ± 0.2, and 1.2 ± 0.1 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1, respectively. (B  ) Effect of preincubation with various concentrations of propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 5. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A 
	) Time course of preincubation with propofol (1 μm) for [3H]norepinephrine uptake. After preincubation with or without propofol for the period indicated, the cells were cultured for another 3 h in propofol-free medium and then incubated at 37°C for 15 min in the presence of [3H]norepinephrine (500 nm). The values of the control group at 6, 12, and 24 h were 1.3 ± 0.2, 1.2 ± 0.2, and 1.2 ± 0.1 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1, respectively. (B 
	) Effect of preincubation with various concentrations of propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 5. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Time course of preincubation with propofol (1 μm) for [3H]norepinephrine uptake. After preincubation with or without propofol for the period indicated, the cells were cultured for another 3 h in propofol-free medium and then incubated at 37°C for 15 min in the presence of [3H]norepinephrine (500 nm). The values of the control group at 6, 12, and 24 h were 1.3 ± 0.2, 1.2 ± 0.2, and 1.2 ± 0.1 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1, respectively. (B  ) Effect of preincubation with various concentrations of propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Fig. 6. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding. (A  ) Plasma membranes (100 μg protein) isolated from cells pretreated with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (10 μm) for 12 h were incubated at 25°C for 30 min in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated four times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 6A.
Fig. 6. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding. (A 
	) Plasma membranes (100 μg protein) isolated from cells pretreated with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (10 μm) for 12 h were incubated at 25°C for 30 min in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated four times with essentially equivalent results. (B 
	) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 6A.
Fig. 6. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding. (A  ) Plasma membranes (100 μg protein) isolated from cells pretreated with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (10 μm) for 12 h were incubated at 25°C for 30 min in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated four times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 6A.
×
Fig. 7. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on norepinephrine transporter (NET) messenger RNA (mRNA) expression. Poly(A)+RNA was isolated from control or propofol-treated cells at the indicated time. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction was performed with a thermocycler using a first-strand cDNA synthesis kit and a Takara Ex Taq kit. (A  ) The time course of NET mRNA expression with (closed column) or without (open column) propofol (30 μm) treatment. The upper figures show single bands for the polymerase chain reaction products for NET and β-actin mRNA after separation by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. SM = size markers (310 and 281 base pairs for NET and 234 and 194 base pairs for β-actin); cont = control; pro = propofol. The lower figures show the relative level of NET mRNA expression determined by quantifying the fluorescence intensity of the bands. (B  ) Effect of treatment with various concentrations of propofol for 12 h on NET mRNA expression. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in triplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 7. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on norepinephrine transporter (NET) messenger RNA (mRNA) expression. Poly(A)+RNA was isolated from control or propofol-treated cells at the indicated time. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction was performed with a thermocycler using a first-strand cDNA synthesis kit and a Takara Ex Taq kit. (A 
	) The time course of NET mRNA expression with (closed column) or without (open column) propofol (30 μm) treatment. The upper figures show single bands for the polymerase chain reaction products for NET and β-actin mRNA after separation by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. SM = size markers (310 and 281 base pairs for NET and 234 and 194 base pairs for β-actin); cont = control; pro = propofol. The lower figures show the relative level of NET mRNA expression determined by quantifying the fluorescence intensity of the bands. (B 
	) Effect of treatment with various concentrations of propofol for 12 h on NET mRNA expression. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in triplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 7. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on norepinephrine transporter (NET) messenger RNA (mRNA) expression. Poly(A)+RNA was isolated from control or propofol-treated cells at the indicated time. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction was performed with a thermocycler using a first-strand cDNA synthesis kit and a Takara Ex Taq kit. (A  ) The time course of NET mRNA expression with (closed column) or without (open column) propofol (30 μm) treatment. The upper figures show single bands for the polymerase chain reaction products for NET and β-actin mRNA after separation by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. SM = size markers (310 and 281 base pairs for NET and 234 and 194 base pairs for β-actin); cont = control; pro = propofol. The lower figures show the relative level of NET mRNA expression determined by quantifying the fluorescence intensity of the bands. (B  ) Effect of treatment with various concentrations of propofol for 12 h on NET mRNA expression. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in triplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Results
Effects of Intravenous Anesthetics on [3H]Norepinephrine Uptake
Uptake of [3H]norepinephrine was linearly related to cell density (0.2–4 × 106cells) and incubation time (10–40 min). 17 Thus, the assay condition (4 × 106cells, 15 min) selected for the subsequent experiments was well within the linear range of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. All anesthetics, including propofol, thiamylal, and diazepam, inhibited [3H]norepinephrine uptake in a concentration-dependent manner (fig. 1). Control values (absent of anesthetics) were 1.12 ± 0.04 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1. From the results of figure 1, each the half-maximal inhibition concentration (IC50) for [3H]norepinephrine uptake by intravenous anesthetics was calculated. Because the inhibition curve by propofol was biphasic, the data of propofol were examined using a modified Scatchard analysis 22 (data not shown), and it was resolved in two components (table 1). Incubation of the cells with increasing concentrations of [3H]norepinephrine (1–30 μm) showed that [3H]norepinephrine uptake was a saturable process (fig. 2A). From Eadie-Hofstee analysis (fig. 2B), all anesthetics produced a significant reduction in the Vmaxwithout altering the Kmvalues (table 1). The kinetic analysis of additional experiments in clinical relevant concentration (5 μm of propofol) showed that low concentration of propofol significantly (P  < 0.05) changed Vmax(control, 10.5 ± 0.4 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1; propofol, 8.7 ± 0.3 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1) but did not change Km(control, 4.9 ± 0.4 μm; propofol, 5.1 ± 0.3 μm; data not shown), suggesting noncompetitive inhibition similar to that observed with a high concentration of propofol.
Effect of Propofol on [3H]Desipramine Binding to Plasma Membranes Isolated from Bovine Adrenal Medulla
A specific binding of [3H]desipramine was found to be saturable (fig. 3A). Scatchard analysis in control [3H]desipramine binding showed a single population of binding site with an apparent K  dof 6.05 ± 0.23 nm and Bmaxof 3.11 ± 0.16 pmol/mg protein (fig. 3B). Propofol (60 μm) inhibited [3H]desipramine binding by increasing the Kd  value to 29.0 ± 4.0 μm (P  < 0.05) without any change in the Bmaxvalue (2.84 ± 0.26 pmol/mg protein;fig. 3B). We also performed the experiment with a clinically relevant concentration. Low concentration (5 μm) of propofol changed Kd  without altering Bmax(data not shown), suggesting competitive inhibition as observed with a high concentration of propofol. As shown in figure 4, propofol inhibited the binding of [3H]desipramine in a concentration-dependent manner (1–300 μm). The inhibition curve appeared to be biphasic. When the data were examined by a modified Scatchard analysis 22 (data not shown), it showed two components with IC50values of 2.8 ± 0.3 μm and 50 ± 6 μm. Furthermore, inhibitory constant (K  i) values of 0.9 ± 0.1 μm and 16 ± 2 μm for inhibition of [3H]desipramine binding by propofol were calculated, 23 respectively.
Effect of Long-term Treatment with Propofol on [3H]Norepinephrine Uptake, [3H]Desipramine Binding, and Norepinephrine Transporter mRNA Expression
Long-term treatment of cells with propofol caused time- (6–24 h) and concentration (1–10 μm)-dependent increases in [3H]norepinephrine uptake (figs. 5A and 5B). In the assay of [3H]desipramine binding, specific binding of [3H]desipramine to the plasma membranes prepared from control and propofol-treated cells was saturable with increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm;fig. 6A). Scatchard analysis showed that 10 μm propofol produced a significant (P  < 0.05) increase in the Bmax(control, 230 ± 18 fmol/mg protein; propofol, 270 ± 13 fmol/mg protein) without any change in the Kd  (control, 6.6 ± 0.3 nm; propofol, 6.3 ± 0.4 nm;fig. 6B). In the assay of mRNA expression, polymerase chain reaction with NET primers and β-actin primers yielded single bands corresponding to approximately 0.3-kb and 0.2-kb fragments, respectively (fig. 7). The band for NET mRNA was sequenced and found to be identical to the reported bovine NET 13 (data not shown). Furthermore, propofol (30 μm) increased the NET mRNA level by 2.2- and 2.0-fold at 12 and 24 h, respectively (fig. 7A). The increase in NET mRNA level produced by propofol was concentration-dependent (10–30 μm;fig. 7B). Each result of NET mRNA was normalized with β-actin mRNA.
Discussion
We demonstrated that all the intravenous anesthetics used in this study inhibited [3H]norepinephrine uptake by cultured adrenal medullary cells. The rank order of the potency to suppress [3H]norepinephrine uptake was propofol, diazepam, and thiamylal. The peak plasma concentration of propofol was reported to be approximately 50 μm after bolus administration. 24 However, the steady state free plasma concentration of propofol may not exceed 2 μm because 98% binds to plasma proteins. In addition, taking protein binding into account, the clinically relevant concentrations of diazepam and thiopental are approximately 1 μm 25 and 25 μm, 3 respectively, and the plasma concentration of the latter is similar to that of thiamylal. 26 At these clinically relevant concentrations, propofol and probably thiamylal seem to inhibit NET function to a small but significant degree. As much as 80% of norepinephrine released from presynaptic terminals is believed to be physiologically reuptaken by the neurons, 27 terminating neurotransmission. Therefore, even a slight inhibition of NET activity by clinical concentrations of anesthetics may enhance neurotransmission.
To address the site of action of propofol on NET, we examined the effects of propofol on the kinetic parameters of [3H]norepinephrine uptake and on [3H]desipramine binding. All of the intravenous anesthetics significantly lowered the Vmaxvalue of [3H]norepinephrine uptake without changing the Km  value, indicating noncompetitive inhibition. Propofol inhibited the specific binding of [3H]desipramine with a potency similar to that of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. Scatchard analysis revealed that propofol significantly increased the Kd  value without affecting the value of Bmax, indicating competitive inhibition. The present results were also confirmed by a clinical concentration of propofol (see Results). Propofol seems to have biphasic effects on [3H]norepinephrine uptake and [3H]desipramine binding (figs. 1 and 4), suggesting that propofol affects the NET at two sites of action, such as high- and a low-affinity sites. Further study is required to confirm this possibility.
Over the past 10 yr, there has been controversy over whether the site of substrate recognition is identical to that for tricyclic antidepressant binding on monoamine transporters. 28,29 From recent molecular cloning and chimeric dopamine–norepinephrine transporter studies, the current prevailing hypothesis is that there are distinct regions within NET molecules that determine substrate recognition and translocation and antagonist affinity, but these regions may overlap each other. 9,30,31 In the present study, the noncompetitive kinetics of [3H]norepinephrine uptake suggest that propofol interacts with NET at a different site from the norepinephrine recognition site. The competitive inhibition of [3H]desipramine binding by propofol suggests that propofol acts directly on the desipramine binding site. Alternatively, propofol and desipramine may act at different sites on the NET that are allosterically coupled. Thus, a simple interpretation of these results is that propofol interacts with NET, which, in turn, may allosterically lead to a conformational change in the transporter that inhibits transporter function. We previously proposed that ketamine inhibits the transport of norepinephrine by interacting with a site that partly overlaps the desipramine binding site on NET. 17 Propofol inhibited [3H]norepinephrine uptake in a manner very similar to that of ketamine. Taken together, our present results provide further evidence to support the hypothesis that in NET molecules there is a common region or areas in close proximity that are susceptible to some intravenous anesthetics. Further studies using various NET mutants produced by molecular techniques are required to determine the precise site of intravenous anesthetic action on NET.
Our findings explain some of the pharmacologic effects of intravenous anesthetics. For instance, intravenous anesthetics may enhance the action of exogenous or endogenous catecholamines. Indeed, propofol and thiamylal are reported to enhance epinephrine-induced arrhythmias in dogs. 32–34 Furthermore, evidence has emerged that the descending inhibitory system consists of noradrenergic neurons. 35 Tricyclic antidepressants, including desipramine, that selectively antagonize NET are used to treat the chronic pain that accompanies postherpetic neuralgia, diabetic neuropathy, cancer, and complex regional pain syndrome. 36–38 Their antinociceptive effect is considered to arise partly from enhancing noradrenergic neurotransmission by inhibiting NET in the descending inhibitory system in the brain and spinal cord. 39 Our results raise the possibility that the inhibitory effects of intravenous anesthetics on NET activity during anesthesia have an antinociceptive action.
Propofol is sometimes administered for prolonged periods during surgery. We found that treatment of cells with clinically relevant concentrations of propofol increased the functional activity of NET and [3H]desipramine binding sites. Presently, clinical significance of the phenomenon is not clear. It may be regarded as a compensatory action of propofol that normalizes the norepinephrine level at noradrenergic synapses during anesthesia.
In conclusion, intravenous anesthetics have a dual effect on NET function: short-term treatment produces inhibition, whereas long-term treatment causes up-regulation. Our findings indicate that NET is one of the target proteins of intravenous anesthetics and help to unveil the pharmacologic basis of this interaction for the better understanding of the various actions of intravenous anesthetics.
References
Franks NP, Lieb WR: Molecular mechanisms of general anaesthesia. Nature 1982; 300: 487–93Franks, NP Lieb, WR
Pocock G, Richards CD: Cellular mechanisms in general anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1991; 66: 116–28Pocock, G Richards, CD
Franks NP, Lieb WR: Molecular and cellular mechanisms of general anaesthesia. Nature 1994; 367: 607–14Franks, NP Lieb, WR
Mihic SJ, Ye Q, Wick MJ, Koltchine VV, Krasowski MD, Finn SE, Mascia MP, Valenzuela CF, Hanson KK, Greenblatt EP, Harris RA, Harrison NL: Sites of alcohol and volatile anaesthetic action on GABA(A) and glycine receptors. Nature 1997; 389: 385–9Mihic, SJ Ye, Q Wick, MJ Koltchine, VV Krasowski, MD Finn, SE Mascia, MP Valenzuela, CF Hanson, KK Greenblatt, EP Harris, RA Harrison, NL
Mantz J, Lecharny JB, Laudenbach V, Henzel D, Peytavin G, Desmonts JM: Anesthetics affect the uptake but not the depolarization-evoked release of GABA in rat striatal synaptosomes. A nesthesiology 1995; 82: 502–11Mantz, J Lecharny, JB Laudenbach, V Henzel, D Peytavin, G Desmonts, JM
El-Maghrabi EA, Eckenhoff RG: Inhibition of dopamine transport in rat brain synaptosomes by volatile anesthetics. A nesthesiology 1993; 78: 750–6El-Maghrabi, EA Eckenhoff, RG
Martin DC, Introna RP, Aronstam RS: Inhibition of neuronal 5-HT uptake by ketamine, but not halothane, involves disruption of substrate recognition by the transporter. Neurosci Lett 1990; 112: 99–103Martin, DC Introna, RP Aronstam, RS
Montel H, Starke K, Gorlitz BD, Schumann HJ: Animal experiments on the effect of ketamine on peripheral sympathetic nerves. Anaesthesist 1973; 22: 111–6Montel, H Starke, K Gorlitz, BD Schumann, HJ
Azzaro AJ, Smith DJ: The inhibitory action of ketamine HC1 on [3H]5-hydroxytryptamine accumulation by rat brain synaptosomal-rich fractions: Comparison with [3H]catecholamine and [3H]g-aminobutyric acid uptake. Neuropharmacology 1977; 16: 349–56Azzaro, AJ Smith, DJ
Salt PJ, Barnes PK, Beswick FJ: Inhibition of neuronal and extraneuronal uptake of noradrenaline by ketamine in the isolated perfused rat heart. Br J Anaesth 1979; 51: 835–8Salt, PJ Barnes, PK Beswick, FJ
Barker EL, Blakely RD: Noradrenaline and serotonin transporters, Psychopharmacology, 4th Edition. Edited by Bloom FE, Kupfer DJ. New York, Raven Press, 1995, pp 321–33
Pacholczyk T, Blakely R, Amara SG: Expression cloning of a cocaine- and antidepressant-sensitive human noradrenaline transporter. Nature 1991; 350: 350–4Pacholczyk, T Blakely, R Amara, SG
Lingen B, Brüss M, Bönisch H: Cloning and expression of the bovine sodium- and chloride-dependent noradrenaline transporter. FEBS Lett 1994; 342: 235–8Lingen, B Brüss, M Bönisch, H
Bönisch H, Brüss M: The noradrenaline transporter of the neuronal plasma membrane. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1994; 733: 193–202Bönisch, H Brüss, M
Yanagihara N, Minami K, Shirakawa F, Uezono Y, Kobayashi H, Eto S, Izumi F: Stimulatory effect of IL-1b on catecholamine secretion from cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1994; 198: 81–7Yanagihara, N Minami, K Shirakawa, F Uezono, Y Kobayashi, H Eto, S Izumi, F
Toyohira Y, Yanagihara N, Minami K, Ueno S, Uezono Y, Tachikawa E, Kondo Y, Kashimoto T, Izumi F: Down-regulation of the noradrenaline transporter by interferon-alpha in cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells. J Neurochem 1998; 70: 1441–7Toyohira, Y Yanagihara, N Minami, K Ueno, S Uezono, Y Tachikawa, E Kondo, Y Kashimoto, T Izumi, F
Hara K, Yanagihara N, Minami K, Ueno S, Toyohira Y, Sata T, Kawamura M, Brüss M, Bönisch H, Shigematsu A, Izumi F: Ketamine interacts with the noradrenaline transporter at a site partly overlapping the desipramine binding site. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Arch Pharmacol 1998; 358: 328–33Hara, K Yanagihara, N Minami, K Ueno, S Toyohira, Y Sata, T Kawamura, M Brüss, M Bönisch, H Shigematsu, A Izumi, F
Yanagihara Y, Isosaki M, Ohuchi T, Oka M: Muscarinic receptor-mediated increase in cyclic GMP level in isolated bovine adrenal medullary cells. FEBS Lett 1979; 105: 296–8Yanagihara, Y Isosaki, M Ohuchi, T Oka, M
Michael-Hepp J, Blum B, Bönisch H: Characterization of the [3H]-desipramine binding site of the bovine adrenomedullary plasma membrane. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Arch Pharmacol 1992; 346: 203–7Michael-Hepp, J Blum, B Bönisch, H
Lowry OH, Rosenbrough NJ, Farr AC, Randall RJ: Protein measurement with Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 1951; 193: 265–75Lowry, OH Rosenbrough, NJ Farr, AC Randall, RJ
Nakamura H, Hirata K, Yamashiro K, Hiranuma K, Shibata K, Higashi K, Morita T, Hirano H: Increase of hepatic mRNAs of profilin, actin and extracellular matrix proteins after carbon tetrachloride treatment and partial hepatectomy in rats. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1994; 198: 568–73Nakamura, H Hirata, K Yamashiro, K Hiranuma, K Shibata, K Higashi, K Morita, T Hirano, H
Minneman KP, Hegstrand LR, Molinoff PB: Simultaneous determination of beta-1 and beta-2 adrenergic receptors in tissues containing both receptor subtypes. Mol Pharmacol 1979; 16: 34–46Minneman, KP Hegstrand, LR Molinoff, PB
Cheng Y-C, Prusoff WH: Relationship between the inhibition constant (Ki) and the concentration of inhibitor which causes 50 per cent inhibition (I50) of an enzymatic reaction. Biochem Pharmacol 1973; 22: 3099–108Cheng, Y-C Prusoff, WH
Cockshott ID: Propofol (Diprivan) pharmacokinetics and metabolism: An overview. Postgrad Med J 1985; 61: 45–50Cockshott, ID
Sunzel M, Paalzow L, Berggren L, Eriksson I: Respiratory and cardiovascular effects in relation to plasma levels of midazolam and diazepam. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1988; 25: 561–9Sunzel, M Paalzow, L Berggren, L Eriksson, I
Hirshman CA, Edelstein RA, Ebertz JM, Hanifin JM: Thiobarbiturate-induced histamine release in human skin mast cells. A nesthesiology 1985; 63: 353–6Hirshman, CA Edelstein, RA Ebertz, JM Hanifin, JM
Amara SG, Kuhar MJ: Neurotransmitter transporters: Recent Progress. Annu Rev Neurosci 1993; 16: 73–93Amara, SG Kuhar, MJ
Schömig E, Körber M, Bönisch H: Kinetic evidence for a common binding site for substrates and inhibitors of the neuronal noradrenaline carrier. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Arch Pharmacol 1988; 33: 626–32Schömig, E Körber, M Bönisch, H
Langer SZ, Galzin AM: Studies on the serotonin transporter in platelets. Experientia 1988; 44: 127–30Langer, SZ Galzin, AM
Kitayama S, Shimada S, Xu H, Markham L, Donovan DM, Uhl GR: Dopamine transporter site-directed mutations differentially alter substrate transport and cocaine binding. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1992; 89: 7782–5Kitayama, S Shimada, S Xu, H Markham, L Donovan, DM Uhl, GR
Buck KJ, Amara SG: Chimeric dopamine-norepinephrine transporters delineate structural domains influencing selectivity for catecholamines and 1-metyl-4-phenylpyridinium. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994; 91: 12584–8Buck, KJ Amara, SG
Muir WW, Werner LL, Hamlin RL: Arrhythmias in dogs associated with epinephrine and thiamylal anesthesia. Am J Vet Res 1975; 36: 1291–7Muir, WW Werner, LL Hamlin, RL
Bednarski RM, Majors LJ, Atlee JL: Epinephrine-induced ventricular arrhythmias in dogs anesthetized with halothane: Potentiation by thiamylal and thiopental. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46: 1829–31Bednarski, RM Majors, LJ Atlee, JL
Kamibayashi T, Hayashi Y, Sumikawa K, Yamatodani A, Kawabata K, Yoshiya I: Enhancement by propofol of epinephrine-induced arrhythmias in dogs. A nesthesiology 1991; 75: 1035–40Kamibayashi, T Hayashi, Y Sumikawa, K Yamatodani, A Kawabata, K Yoshiya, I
Fields HL, Basbaum AI: Central nervous system mechanisms of pain modulation, Textbook of Pain, 4th Edition. Edited by Wall PD, Melzack R. Edinburgh, Churchill Livingstone, 1999, pp 309–29
Max MB, Lynch SA, Muir J, Shoaf SE, Smoller B, Dubner R: Effects of desipramine, amitriptyline, and fluoxetine on pain in diabetic neuropathy. N Engl J Med 1992; 326: 1250–6Max, MB Lynch, SA Muir, J Shoaf, SE Smoller, B Dubner, R
Max MB: Treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia: Antidepressants. Ann Neurol 1994; 35: S50–3Max, MB
McQuay HJ, Tramer M, Nye BA, Carroll D, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA: A systematic review of antidepressants in neuropathic pain. Pain 1996; 68: 217–27McQuay, HJ Tramer, M Nye, BA Carroll, D Wiffen, PJ Moore, RA
Monks R, Merskey H: Psychotropic drugs, Textbook of Pain, 4th Edition. Edited by Wall PD, Melzack R. Edinburgh, Churchill Livingstone, 1999, pp 1155–86
Fig. 1. Effects of intravenous anesthetics on desipramine-sensitive [3H]norepinephrine uptake. Cultured cells (4 × 106per dish) were incubated at 37°C for 15 min with 500 nm [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm), thiamylal (3–1,000 μm), or diazepam (3–1,000 μm). The results are expressed as a percentage of control values. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 1. Effects of intravenous anesthetics on desipramine-sensitive [3H]norepinephrine uptake. Cultured cells (4 × 106per dish) were incubated at 37°C for 15 min with 500 nm [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm), thiamylal (3–1,000 μm), or diazepam (3–1,000 μm). The results are expressed as a percentage of control values. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 1. Effects of intravenous anesthetics on desipramine-sensitive [3H]norepinephrine uptake. Cultured cells (4 × 106per dish) were incubated at 37°C for 15 min with 500 nm [3H]norepinephrine in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm), thiamylal (3–1,000 μm), or diazepam (3–1,000 μm). The results are expressed as a percentage of control values. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Fig. 2. Saturation curve of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Cells were incubated with or without 100 μm propofol, thiamylal, or diazepam, and in the presence of various concentrations (1–30 μm) of [3H]norepinephrine at 37°C for 15 min. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. (B  ) Eadie-Hofstee analysis of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The data were obtained from fig. 2A. V/S = velocity/substrate.
Fig. 2. Saturation curve of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A 
	) Cells were incubated with or without 100 μm propofol, thiamylal, or diazepam, and in the presence of various concentrations (1–30 μm) of [3H]norepinephrine at 37°C for 15 min. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. (B 
	) Eadie-Hofstee analysis of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The data were obtained from fig. 2A. V/S = velocity/substrate.
Fig. 2. Saturation curve of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Cells were incubated with or without 100 μm propofol, thiamylal, or diazepam, and in the presence of various concentrations (1–30 μm) of [3H]norepinephrine at 37°C for 15 min. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. (B  ) Eadie-Hofstee analysis of [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The data were obtained from fig. 2A. V/S = velocity/substrate.
×
Fig. 3. Saturation curve of nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding to plasma membranes. (A  ) Plasma membranes (10 μg protein) from bovine adrenal medulla were incubated at 25°C for 30 min with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (60 μm) and in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Nonspecific bindings are expressed as dotted lines in the presence (filled triangles) or absence (open triangles) of propofol. Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated five times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 3A. B/F = bound/free.
Fig. 3. Saturation curve of nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding to plasma membranes. (A 
	) Plasma membranes (10 μg protein) from bovine adrenal medulla were incubated at 25°C for 30 min with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (60 μm) and in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Nonspecific bindings are expressed as dotted lines in the presence (filled triangles) or absence (open triangles) of propofol. Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated five times with essentially equivalent results. (B 
	) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 3A. B/F = bound/free.
Fig. 3. Saturation curve of nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding to plasma membranes. (A  ) Plasma membranes (10 μg protein) from bovine adrenal medulla were incubated at 25°C for 30 min with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (60 μm) and in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Nonspecific bindings are expressed as dotted lines in the presence (filled triangles) or absence (open triangles) of propofol. Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated five times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 3A. B/F = bound/free.
×
Fig. 4. Effect of various concentrations of propofol on [3H]desipramine binding. Plasma membranes were incubated with [3H]desipramine (10 nm) at 25°C for 30 min in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm). Control values (0 μm propofol) for specific binding were 2.26 ± 0.11 pmol/mg protein. The results are the means (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 4. Effect of various concentrations of propofol on [3H]desipramine binding. Plasma membranes were incubated with [3H]desipramine (10 nm) at 25°C for 30 min in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm). Control values (0 μm propofol) for specific binding were 2.26 ± 0.11 pmol/mg protein. The results are the means (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 4. Effect of various concentrations of propofol on [3H]desipramine binding. Plasma membranes were incubated with [3H]desipramine (10 nm) at 25°C for 30 min in the presence or absence of propofol (0.1–300 μm). Control values (0 μm propofol) for specific binding were 2.26 ± 0.11 pmol/mg protein. The results are the means (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Fig. 5. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Time course of preincubation with propofol (1 μm) for [3H]norepinephrine uptake. After preincubation with or without propofol for the period indicated, the cells were cultured for another 3 h in propofol-free medium and then incubated at 37°C for 15 min in the presence of [3H]norepinephrine (500 nm). The values of the control group at 6, 12, and 24 h were 1.3 ± 0.2, 1.2 ± 0.2, and 1.2 ± 0.1 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1, respectively. (B  ) Effect of preincubation with various concentrations of propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 5. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A 
	) Time course of preincubation with propofol (1 μm) for [3H]norepinephrine uptake. After preincubation with or without propofol for the period indicated, the cells were cultured for another 3 h in propofol-free medium and then incubated at 37°C for 15 min in the presence of [3H]norepinephrine (500 nm). The values of the control group at 6, 12, and 24 h were 1.3 ± 0.2, 1.2 ± 0.2, and 1.2 ± 0.1 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1, respectively. (B 
	) Effect of preincubation with various concentrations of propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 5. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. (A  ) Time course of preincubation with propofol (1 μm) for [3H]norepinephrine uptake. After preincubation with or without propofol for the period indicated, the cells were cultured for another 3 h in propofol-free medium and then incubated at 37°C for 15 min in the presence of [3H]norepinephrine (500 nm). The values of the control group at 6, 12, and 24 h were 1.3 ± 0.2, 1.2 ± 0.2, and 1.2 ± 0.1 pmol · 4 × 106cells−1· min−1, respectively. (B  ) Effect of preincubation with various concentrations of propofol on [3H]norepinephrine uptake. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in duplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Fig. 6. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding. (A  ) Plasma membranes (100 μg protein) isolated from cells pretreated with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (10 μm) for 12 h were incubated at 25°C for 30 min in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated four times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 6A.
Fig. 6. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding. (A 
	) Plasma membranes (100 μg protein) isolated from cells pretreated with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (10 μm) for 12 h were incubated at 25°C for 30 min in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated four times with essentially equivalent results. (B 
	) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 6A.
Fig. 6. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on nisoxetine-sensitive [3H]desipramine binding. (A  ) Plasma membranes (100 μg protein) isolated from cells pretreated with (filled circles) or without (open circles) propofol (10 μm) for 12 h were incubated at 25°C for 30 min in the presence of increasing concentrations of [3H]desipramine (2–24 nm). Experiments were conducted in duplicate and repeated four times with essentially equivalent results. (B  ) Scatchard plot analysis of [3H]desipramine binding. The data were obtained from fig. 6A.
×
Fig. 7. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on norepinephrine transporter (NET) messenger RNA (mRNA) expression. Poly(A)+RNA was isolated from control or propofol-treated cells at the indicated time. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction was performed with a thermocycler using a first-strand cDNA synthesis kit and a Takara Ex Taq kit. (A  ) The time course of NET mRNA expression with (closed column) or without (open column) propofol (30 μm) treatment. The upper figures show single bands for the polymerase chain reaction products for NET and β-actin mRNA after separation by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. SM = size markers (310 and 281 base pairs for NET and 234 and 194 base pairs for β-actin); cont = control; pro = propofol. The lower figures show the relative level of NET mRNA expression determined by quantifying the fluorescence intensity of the bands. (B  ) Effect of treatment with various concentrations of propofol for 12 h on NET mRNA expression. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in triplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 7. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on norepinephrine transporter (NET) messenger RNA (mRNA) expression. Poly(A)+RNA was isolated from control or propofol-treated cells at the indicated time. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction was performed with a thermocycler using a first-strand cDNA synthesis kit and a Takara Ex Taq kit. (A 
	) The time course of NET mRNA expression with (closed column) or without (open column) propofol (30 μm) treatment. The upper figures show single bands for the polymerase chain reaction products for NET and β-actin mRNA after separation by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. SM = size markers (310 and 281 base pairs for NET and 234 and 194 base pairs for β-actin); cont = control; pro = propofol. The lower figures show the relative level of NET mRNA expression determined by quantifying the fluorescence intensity of the bands. (B 
	) Effect of treatment with various concentrations of propofol for 12 h on NET mRNA expression. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in triplicate. *P 
	< 0.05 compared with control.
Fig. 7. The effect of long-term treatment with propofol on norepinephrine transporter (NET) messenger RNA (mRNA) expression. Poly(A)+RNA was isolated from control or propofol-treated cells at the indicated time. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction was performed with a thermocycler using a first-strand cDNA synthesis kit and a Takara Ex Taq kit. (A  ) The time course of NET mRNA expression with (closed column) or without (open column) propofol (30 μm) treatment. The upper figures show single bands for the polymerase chain reaction products for NET and β-actin mRNA after separation by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. SM = size markers (310 and 281 base pairs for NET and 234 and 194 base pairs for β-actin); cont = control; pro = propofol. The lower figures show the relative level of NET mRNA expression determined by quantifying the fluorescence intensity of the bands. (B  ) Effect of treatment with various concentrations of propofol for 12 h on NET mRNA expression. The results are the mean (±SD) of four separate experiments conducted in triplicate. *P  < 0.05 compared with control.
×
Table 1. Effects of Various Intravenous Anesthetics on the Kinetic Parameters for [3H]Norepinephrine Uptake
Image not available
Table 1. Effects of Various Intravenous Anesthetics on the Kinetic Parameters for [3H]Norepinephrine Uptake
×