↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Evaluation of the cardiotoxicity and resuscitation of rats of a newly developed mixture of a QX-314 analog and levobupivacaine

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of the cardiotoxicity and resuscitation of rats of a newly developed mixture of a QX-314 analog and levobupivacaine
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, March 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s126396
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qi Wang, Qinqin Yin, Jun Yang, Bowen Ke, Linghui Yang, Jin Liu, Wensheng Zhang

Abstract

This study was designed to evaluate the cardiotoxicity of a QX-314 analog (QX-OH) and a mixture of QX-OH and levobupivacaine (LL-1) and to compare the ability to resuscitate rats after asystole induced by levobupivacaine (Levo-BUP), QX-314, QX-OH, and LL-1. First, we used the "up-and-down" method to determine median dose resulting in appearance of cardiotoxicity (CD50C) and asystole (CD50A) of Levo-BUP, QX-314, QX-OH, and LL-1 in rats. Safety index (SI; ratio of CD50C compared with 2-fold median effective dose needed to produce sensory blockade) of the 4 drugs was calculated. Isobolograms were used for drug interaction analysis. Second, rats received 1.2-fold CD50A in the 4 groups. When asystole occurred, standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation was started and continued for 30 min or until return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) with native rate-pressure product ≥30% baseline for 5 min. Ranking of CD50C was Levo-BUP < QX-314 ≈ QX-OH. Ranking of CD50A was Levo-BUP < QX-314 < QX-OH. However, the SI of Levo-BUP was significantly higher than that of QX-314 (10.60 vs. 1.20) or QX-OH (10.60 vs. 1.44). The SI of LL-1 was similar to that of Levo-BUP. Nonsynergistic interaction was observed for cardiac effects between QX-OH and Levo-BUP. ROSC was attained initially by 8 of 8 rats in the Levo-BUP group, 3 of 8 in the QX-314 group, 6 of 8 in the QX-OH group, and 8 of 8 in the LL-1 group. Sustained recovery was achieved in the Levo-BUP group but not in the other groups. Levo-BUP and LL-1 are safer than QX-314 or QX-OH. Cardiac effects between QX-OH and Levo-BUP were nonsynergistic. Initial successful resuscitation could be achieved in the QX-OH- and LL-1-induced asystole, but advanced life support might be needed.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unknown 6 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 March 2017.
All research outputs
#8,029,922
of 9,264,233 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#573
of 630 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,322
of 260,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#46
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,264,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 630 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,501 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.