Premium
Meloxicam prevents COX‐2‐mediated post‐surgical inflammation but not pain following laparotomy in mice
Author(s) -
Roughan J.V.,
Bertrand H.G.M.J.,
Isles H.M.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
european journal of pain
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.305
H-Index - 109
eISSN - 1532-2149
pISSN - 1090-3801
DOI - 10.1002/ejp.712
Subject(s) - meloxicam , laparotomy , medicine , inflammation , saline , anesthesia , pharmacology , surgery
Background Inflammation is thought to be a major contributor to post‐surgical pain, so non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs ( NSAID s) are commonly used analgesics. However, compared to rats, considerably less is known as to how successfully these prevent pain in mice. Methods A fluorescent COX ‐2 selective probe was used for the first time to evaluate the post‐surgical anti‐inflammatory effects of meloxicam, and automated behaviour analyses (HomeCageScan; HCS ), the Mouse Grimace Scale ( MGS ) and body weight changes to assess its pain‐preventative properties. Groups of 8–9 BALB /c mice were subcutaneously injected with saline (0.3 mL) or meloxicam at (1, 5 or 20 mg/kg) 1 h before a 1.5‐cm midline laparotomy. The probe or a control dye (2 mg/kg) was injected intravenously 3 h later. Imaging was used to quantify inflammation at 7, 24 and 48 h following surgery. HCS data and MGS scores were respectively obtained from video recordings and photographs before surgery and 24 h later. Results Post‐surgical inflammation was dose dependently reduced by meloxicam; with 5 or 20 mg/kg being most effective compared to saline. However, all mice lost weight, MGS scores increased and behavioural activity was reduced by surgery for at least 24 h with no perceivable beneficial effect of meloxicam on any of these potentially pain‐associated changes. Conclusions Although meloxicam prevented inflammation, even large doses did not prevent post‐laparotomy pain possibly arising due to a range of factors, including, but not limited to inflammation. MGS scoring can be applied by very naïve assessors and so should be effective for cage‐side use.