Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Dental Research
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hofman, S.
Right arrow Articles by Boucher, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hofman, S.
Right arrow Articles by Boucher, Y.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Effects of Excitatory Amino Acid Receptor Antagonists on Pulpal Blood Flow of the Rat Mandibular Incisor

S. Hofman*, J. Azérad and Y. Boucher

Laboratoire de Physiologie de la Manducation, Université Paris 7—Denis Diderot, 2 Place Jussieu, Bât. A, 2ème étage, 75005 Paris, France;


Figure 1
View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 1. Examples of pulpal blood flow (PBF) recordings in control vs. stimulated tooth. (A) Example of recording curves (15-minute sweeps) when bipolar electrical stimulation (10 sec, 50 µA, 2 ms, 20 Hz) was performed on 1 rat mandibular incisor. PBF changes of stimulated tooth (top), PBF of contralateral incisor that was monitored as control (second), and differential PBF, which we calculated by subtracting the values measured on control tooth from those measured on the stimulated tooth (third), are shown. Mean arterial blood pressure (BP) was monitored in parallel (bottom). Values are expressed in percentages of baseline levels. (B) Example of PBF monitoring (15-minute sweeps) on both mandibular incisors of 1 animal during intravenous injection of an EAA receptor antagonist (here MPPG, 0.15 mg/kg); differential PBF evolution is also shown.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 2. Differential pulpal blood flow (PBF) changes induced by bipolar electrical stimulation (10 sec, 50 µA, 2 ms, 20 Hz) of 1 rat mandibular incisor after systemic administration of ionotropic GluR antagonists. (A) Amplitude and duration of initial pulpal neurogenic blood flow decrease. (B) Amplitude and duration of late pulpal neurogenic blood flow increase. {square} Control group, Figure 2 MK 801 group, {blacksquare} Ketamine group, Figure 2 Gyki 52466 group. Control rats were injected i.v. with 200 µL of physiological saline (vehicle). Amplitude is expressed in percentage of variation of differential PBF from baseline level (difference between stimulated and control teeth). Duration is expressed in sec. Values are means ± SEM. Differences among experimental groups were evaluated by one-way ANOVA. For the immediate blood flow decrease and for the late blood flow increase, no statistical differences were found among groups.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 3. Differential pulpal blood flow (PBF) changes induced by bipolar electrical stimulation (10 sec, 50 µA, 2 ms, 20 Hz) of 1 rat mandibular incisor after systemic administration of metabotropic GluRs antagonists. (A) Amplitude and duration of initial pulpal neurogenic blood flow decrease. (B) Amplitude and duration of late pulpal neurogenic blood flow increase. {square} Control group, Figure 3 MCPG 2.2 mg/kg group, {blacksquare} MCPG 7.5 mg/kg group, Figure 3 MPPG 0.15 mg/kg group, Figure 3 MPPG 2.18 mg/kg group. Control rats were injected i.v. with 200 µL of a mix of 1M NaOH (105 µL/kg) and physiological saline (vehicle). Amplitude is expressed in percentage of variation of differential PBF from baseline level (difference between stimulated and control teeth). Duration is expressed in sec. Values are means ± SEM. Differences among experimental groups were evaluated by one-way ANOVA; **indicates differences that were significant for both amplitude and duration of initial blood flow decrease for animals injected with MCPG 7.5 mg/kg compared with vehicle-treated animals (p < 0.05, n = 5). For the late blood flow increase, no statistical differences were found among groups.

 

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 81, No. 4, 253-258 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/154405910208100406


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?