This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
UNLABELLED: Human TWIK-related K(+) channels (TREK-1) stabilize the membrane potential (mp) of neurons and have a major role in the regulation of membrane excitability. In view of their physiological significance, interaction of bupivacaine with TREK-1 channels may be clinically important. Our aim was to characterize with the patch-clamp technique the properties of human TREK-1 channels and the effects of bupivacaine on these channels expressed in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells. Transfection of CHO cells with TREK-1 channels (CHO(TREK-1) cells) hyperpolarized the mp from -33 +/- 13 to -78 +/- 4 mV. The channels were stimulated by intracellular acidosis. Inhibition of TREK-1 channels by bupivacaine was reversible, concentration-dependent, voltage-independent, and increased with intracellular acidosis. Bupivacaine depolarized the mp of CHO(TREK-1) cells in a reversible and concentration-dependent manner. Concentrations for channel inhibition and membrane depolarization were not linearly related (50% inhibitory concentration value for channel inhibition 370 +/- 20 micro M, Hill coefficient 1.8 +/- 0.1, n = 51; 50% inhibitory concentration value for membrane depolarization 856 +/- 14 micro M, Hill coefficient 2.4 +/- 0.1, mean +/- SEM, n = 27). The results suggest that protonated bupivacaine elicits the observed effects via a site of interaction accessible from the intracellular space. Inhibition of TREK-1 channels and consecutive depolarization of the cell membrane by bupivacaine may contribute to blockade of neuronal signal conduction during regional anesthesia. IMPLICATIONS: The interaction of bupivacaine with human TREK-1 channels was studied with the patch-clamp technique. Bupivacaine inhibited TREK-1 channels and depolarized the membrane potential of cells expressing TREK-1 channels in a concentration-dependent and reversible manner. Both effects may contribute to conductance block caused by bupivacaine.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Punke et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: