AIMS: The contribution of individual CB receptors (CB1 R and CB2 R) to normal micturition has not been clearly defined. Our goal was to study if differences in urodynamic parameters or in vitro bladder contractility can be demonstrated between CB2 R knockout (CB2 RKO) and C57BL/6J control (wild type, WT) mice. METHODS: Female WT and CB2 RKO mice underwent bladder catheterization and cystometry was performed after 2 and 3 days. Cystometric evaluations were performed in awake animals without drug administration, and WT were also given HU-308 (CB2 R agonist) followed by AM630 (CB2 R antagonist). Bladders were removed for in vitro assessment of contractile responses to carbachol and electrical field stimulation (EFS). RESULTS: CB2 RKO mice had significantly higher intercontraction intervals (ICIs), bladder capacity (BC) and compliance (Bcom) than WT controls (P < 0.05). In WT mice, BC and ICI were increased from baseline by HU-308 exposure, and then returned to baseline levels after AM630 administration (P < 0.05). There were no differences in contractility after carbachol or EFS between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of CB2 R was associated with longer ICI and higher BC and Bcom than its presence (WT controls). This was unexpected since in WT, an increase in BC and ICI from baseline was observed after CB2 R agonist administration, and this action was reversed by a CB2 R antagonist. Since there were no differences in the in vitro responses to carbachol and EFS in bladder strips, it may be speculated that the urodynamic differences are caused by a change in the central nervous micturition control in CB2 RKO animals. Neurourol. Urodynam. 33:566-570, 2014.
AIMS: The contribution of individual CB receptors (CB1 R and CB2 R) to normal micturition has not been clearly defined. Our goal was to study if differences in urodynamic parameters or in vitro bladder contractility can be demonstrated between CB2 R knockout (CB2 RKO) and C57BL/6J control (wild type, WT) mice. METHODS: Female WT and CB2 RKO mice underwent bladder catheterization and cystometry was performed after 2 and 3 days. Cystometric evaluations were performed in awake animals without drug administration, and WT were also given HU-308 (CB2 R agonist) followed by AM630 (CB2 R antagonist). Bladders were removed for in vitro assessment of contractile responses to carbachol and electrical field stimulation (EFS). RESULTS: CB2 RKO mice had significantly higher intercontraction intervals (ICIs), bladder capacity (BC) and compliance (Bcom) than WT controls (P < 0.05). In WT mice, BC and ICI were increased from baseline by HU-308 exposure, and then returned to baseline levels after AM630 administration (P < 0.05). There were no differences in contractility after carbachol or EFS between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of CB2 R was associated with longer ICI and higher BC and Bcom than its presence (WT controls). This was unexpected since in WT, an increase in BC and ICI from baseline was observed after CB2 R agonist administration, and this action was reversed by a CB2 R antagonist. Since there were no differences in the in vitro responses to carbachol and EFS in bladder strips, it may be speculated that the urodynamic differences are caused by a change in the central nervous micturition control in CB2 RKO animals. Neurourol. Urodynam. 33:566-570, 2014.