Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The effect of the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor NG-Nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME) towards muscarinic receptors was studied in vitro and in vivo. L-NAME displaced the antimuscarinic ligand [3H]quinuclidinyl benzilate ([3H]QNB) from its specific binding sites in rat cerebral cortex and cerebellum homogenates with a more than 10,000 fold lower affinity than atropine, pirenzepine and AFDX 116. Data for L-NAME binding were best fit according to a two-site model (Kd 7.2 nM and 3,000 nM) in the rat cerebellum, whereas in rat cortex a one-site model (Kd 1670 nM) was superior. In anesthetized rats and rabbits L-NAME (7.5-185 mumol/kg) attenuated a hypotensive response to Acetyl beta-methyl-choline (Ac beta-Me Ch)(6.25 nmol/kg) in a dose related fashion, but this effect was negligible as compared to that of atropine (8.8 and 17.7 nmol/kg). Furthermore, the effect of L-NAME was not specifically antimuscarinic since its attenuating effect against ATP- or histamine-induced responses was not statistically different from that of Ac beta-Me Ch. A vagus stimulation induced bradycardia was entirely uninfluenced by L-NAME (37 mumol/kg). In isolated bladder experiments (rabbit) we demonstrated a complete lack of efficacy of L-NAME against Ac beta-Me Ch induced contractions. In the pithed rat preparation L-NAME was ineffective against the MeN-A-343 induced pressor responses. In summary, we demonstrated that the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor L-NAME shows very weak affinity at M1- and M2-receptors in the rat brain in vitro, but appears to have no significant antimuscarinic properties against M1-, M2- and M3-receptor mediated effects in rats and rabbits in vivo.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hellmich et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: