Effects of preemptive or postinjury intrathecal local anesthesia on persistent nociceptive responses in rats. Confounding influences of peripheral inflammation and the general anesthetic regimen.

BACKGROUND: Although experimental evidence indicates that preemptive intrathecal treatment with local anesthetics reduces postinjury neuronal hyperexcitability, clinical evidence indicates that preemptive treatments do not consistently reduce postoperative pain. The current study used experimental models of postinjury nociception, in which rats received subcutaneous or intraarticular injections of the irritant formalin, to evaluate the effects of peripheral inflammation, or the use of agents supplemental to anesthesia, as possible confounding influences on the effectiveness of preinjury and postinjury intrathecal local anesthetic treatments.
METHODS: In experiment 1, lumbar intrathecal lidocaine (30 microliters, 2%), given either 5 min before or 5 min after hind paw injection of 50 microliters of varying concentrations of formalin, was compared with intrathecal cerebrospinal fluid, for their effects on nociceptive responses in the late phase of the formalin test. Furthermore, the effect of hind paw injection of 50 microliters of 2.5, 3.75, or 5.0% formalin on peripheral inflammation was assessed by measuring plasma extravasation in the hind paws of rats given Evans Blue dye (50 mg/kg, intravenous). In experiment 2, rats received a deep tissue injury (100 microliters of 5.0% formalin into the knee joint) while under halothane anesthesia. In addition to halothane (3-4%), rats received either saline, pentobarbital (13 mg/kg, intraperitoneal), or pentobarbital + morphine (0.5 mg/kg, intravenous), with or without preinjury or postinjury spinal anesthesia using intrathecal bupivacaine (30 microliters, 0.75%), to assess the effects of supplemental treatments on the preemptive effects of intrathecal bupivacaine.
RESULTS: Lumbar intrathecal lidocaine pretreatment, but not posttreatment, significantly reduced late phase nociceptive responses to hind paw injections of 2.5% formalin. The preemptive effects of lidocaine were overridden in rats that received hind paw injections of 3.75 and 5.0% formalin. Hind paw injection of 50 microliters of 3.75 or 5.0%, but not 2.5% formalin produced an increase in plasma extravasation. Either pentobarbital or pentobarbital + morphine treatment, or a pentobarbital + morphine treatment and postinjury treatment with intrathecal bupivacaine failed to produce a significant reduction in the nociceptive response to the deep tissue injury. However, rats that received pentobarbital + morphine treatments and intrathecal bupivacaine before the injury had significantly reduced nociceptive responses to deep tissue injury when compared to the saline control group, but not to the group that received pentobarbital + morphine treatment and postinjury treatment with bupivacaine.
CONCLUSIONS: The current results attest to the important effects of ongoing inputs from inflamed tissue, and the use of supplemental treatments, as important confounding factors that may influence the effectiveness of preemptive spinal anesthesia for postoperative pain.