Anesthesiology
-
Available treatments for neuropathic pain have modest efficacy and significant adverse effects, including abuse potential. Because oxidative stress is a key mechanistic node for neuropathic pain, the authors focused on the master regulator of the antioxidant response-nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (NFE2L2; Nrf2)-as an alternative target for neuropathic pain. The authors tested whether dimethyl fumarate (U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for multiple sclerosis) would activate NFE2L2 and promote antioxidant activity to reverse neuropathic pain behaviors and oxidative stress-dependent mechanisms. ⋯ Dimethyl fumarate, a nonopioid and orally-bioavailable drug, alleviated nociceptive hypersensitivity induced by peripheral nerve injury via activation of NFE2L2 antioxidant signaling. Dimethyl fumarate also resolved neuroinflammation and mitochondrial dysfunction-oxidative stress-dependent mechanisms that drive nociceptive hypersensitivity after nerve injury.
-
Prolonged endoplasmic reticulum stress has been identified in various diseases. Inflammatory mediators, which have been shown to induce endoplasmic reticulum stress in several studies, have been suggested to serve as the important modulators in pain development. In this study, the authors hypothesized that the endoplasmic reticulum stress triggered by inflammatory mediators contributed to pain development. ⋯ Inhibition of inflammatory mediator-triggered endoplasmic reticulum stress in spinal neurons attenuates bone cancer pain via modulation of neuroinflammation, which suggests new approaches to pain relief.
-
Pressure-support ventilation may worsen lung damage due to increased dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure. The authors hypothesized that, at the same tidal volume (VT) and dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure, pressure-support and pressure-controlled ventilation would yield comparable lung damage in mild lung injury. ⋯ In the mild lung injury model use herein, at the same VT, pressure-support compared to pressure-controlled ventilation did not affect biologic markers. However, pressure-support ventilation was associated with a major difference between static and dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure; when the same dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure and inspiratory time were used for pressure-controlled ventilation, greater lung and diaphragm injury occurred compared to pressure-support ventilation.