Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
« Previous Article | Table of Contents | Next Article »
Circulation. 2001;103:850-855

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kienbaum, P.
Right arrow Articles by Peters, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kienbaum, P.
Right arrow Articles by Peters, J.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Compound via MeSH
*Substance via MeSH
Hazardous Substances DB
*EPINEPHRINE
*METHADONE
*NALOXONE
Related Collections
Right arrow Cardiovascular Pharmacology
Right arrow Autonomic, reflex, and neurohumoral control of circulation

(Circulation. 2001;103:850.)
© 2001 American Heart Association, Inc.

Clinical Investigation and Reports

Chronic µ-Opioid Receptor Stimulation in Humans Decreases Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity

Peter Kienbaum, MD; Thorsten Heuter; Martin C. Michel, MD; Norbert Scherbaum, MD; Markus Gastpar, MD; Jürgen Peters, MD

From the Abteilung für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin (P.K., T.H., J.P.), Biochemisches Forschungslabor (M.C.M.), and Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie (N.S., M.G.), Universitätsklinikum Essen, Germany.

Correspondence to Dr. med. Peter Kienbaum, Abteilung für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Hufelandstraße 55, D-45122 Essen, Germany. E-mail peter.kienbaum{at}uni-essen.de


*    Abstract
up arrowTop
 *Abstract
down arrowIntroduction
 down arrowMethods
 down arrowResults
 down arrowDiscussion
 down arrowReferences
 
Background—Opioid-addicted patients undergoing detoxification provide a unique opportunity to assess the effects of chronic opioid receptor stimulation on the sympathetic nervous system. We tested the hypothesis that chronic oral methadone intake decreases resting efferent sympathetic nerve activity to muscle (MSA). Furthermore, we assessed whether this effect is reversed by µ-opioid receptor blockade during antagonist-supported detoxification under general anesthesia.

Methods and Results—Fifteen young patients (30±1 years old, mean±SEM) with a long history of mono-opioid addiction and under oral methadone substitution therapy (65±10 mg/d for 21±6 months) were selected. Peroneal MSA (microneurography) and catecholamine plasma concentrations (high-performance liquid chromatography) were assessed in the awake state and compared with those of age-matched healthy control subjects. The effects of µ-opioid receptor blockade by naloxone (12.4 mg IV) were determined during propofol anesthesia. Compared with healthy volunteers, resting MSA (4±2 versus 22±2 bursts/min, P<0.0001) and antecubital venous norepinephrine plasma concentration (100±64 versus 256±48 pg/mL, P=0.01) were markedly decreased in addicted patients despite similar arterial blood pressure and heart rate. Opioid receptor blockade markedly increased MSA (5±2 to 24±3 bursts/min) and norepinephrine (49±12 to 305±48 pg/mL) and epinephrine (13±2 to 482±67 pg/mL) arterial plasma concentrations as well as mean arterial pressure (82±4 to 108±3 mm Hg) and heart rate (70±3 to 86±4 beats/min).

Conclusions—Chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation by methadone decreases resting MSA in humans.


Key Words: anesthesia • nervous system, autonomic • catecholamines • circulation • heart failure • hemodynamics • norepinephrine • pharmacology


*    Introduction
up arrowTop
 up arrowAbstract
 *Introduction
down arrowMethods
 down arrowResults
 down arrowDiscussion
 down arrowReferences
 
The central and peripheral sympathetic system and the heart and vasculature contain µ-opioid receptors, but their contribution to circulatory regulation, particularly in chronic states of opioid receptor stimulation, is not well defined.1 2 Acute administration of µ-opioid receptor agonists provides little insight in this respect, because any effects are blurred by respiratory depression, an altered state of consciousness, or even anesthesia.3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Furthermore, under resting conditions, µ-opioid receptor blockade by naloxone, which attenuates the effects of endogenous opioids, does not change muscle sympathetic activity (MSA), arterial baroreflex gain, or catecholamine plasma concentrations in healthy volunteers.12 13 14 15 16

Conversely, naloxone potentiates the increase in MSA during exercise and in response to lower-body negative pressure, indicating inhibition of MSA by endogenous opioids when the sympathetic nervous system is activated.15 17 18 Moreover, during sympathetic activation in experimental congestive heart failure (CHF), µ-opioid receptor blockade attenuates both decreased adrenergic inotropic responsiveness and baroreflex sensitivity, whereas cardiac function is improved.19 20 21 Finally, in contrast to subjects with physiological endogenous opioid activity, naloxone administration in patients with CHF prevents an attenuated inotropic response to adrenergic stimulation.22 23 Thus, opioid effects on sympathetic cardiovascular control may depend on the duration of opioid receptor stimulation and/or degree of resting sympathetic activity.

Patients addicted to opioids consume and are adapted to otherwise lethal opioid dosages, with respiratory regulation adapted to chronic opioid receptor agonist stimulation.24 Under these unique conditions, the effects of chronic opioid receptor stimulation on sympathetic nervous system and cardiovascular regulation can be studied both under resting conditions and after opioid receptor blockade, unmasking opioid effects. Therefore, in patients addicted to opioids alone for almost 10 years, we tested the hypothesis that chronic opioid receptor stimulation decreases resting efferent sympathetic nerve activity to muscle. In addition, we assessed the effects when opioids are acutely displaced from their receptors.


*    Methods
up arrowTop
 up arrowAbstract
 up arrowIntroduction
 *Methods
down arrowResults
 down arrowDiscussion
 down arrowReferences
 
Subjects
The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee and is consistent with the Helsinki declarations. Subjects were enrolled on a voluntary basis and gave written informed consent.

Patients Chronically Addicted to Opioids
Fifteen patients (3 women and 12 men; age, 30±1 years, mean±SEM; range, 20 to 37 years) were enrolled from a methadone outpatient care unit to undergo rapid detoxification during general anesthesia. All had a long history of opioid addiction (9±2 years; range, 2 to 26 years) and received oral methadone substitution therapy (65±10 mg/d; range, 10 to 150 mg/d, for 21±6 months; range, 1 to 60 months) to prevent heroin intake. Methadone therapy resulted in high urinary methadone concentrations (3273±324 ng/mL). Other than methadone, the patients reported not having consumed other drugs. This was confirmed by weekly urine toxicology screens (sensitive for opioids, methadone, benzodiazepines, cocaine, amphetamine/metamphetamine, barbiturates, tetrahydrocannabinol, and tricyclic antidepressants), with the last test made on the day before study and detoxification. Patients did not suffer from other overt disease. Six patients, however, had serological evidence of having been exposed to the hepatitis B or C virus in the past but did not show current clinical or laboratory signs of abnormal liver function or active infection.

The last dose of methadone was given 24 hours before naloxone treatment. A small dose of flunitrazepam (0.5 mg PO; Rohypnol, Roche) was administered only on patient demand before transfer to our intensive care unit at 7:00 AM.

Healthy Volunteers
Six unpremedicated healthy normotensive volunteers (who participated in an unrelated study performed at the same time) were matched by sex, age, and body mass index to 6 addicted patients not receiving premedication. As a result of matching, both groups were similar in sex (6 men each), age (control subjects, 29±2 versus patients, 29±3 years), and body mass index (control subjects, 22.0±0.8 versus patients, 21.8±0.6 kg/m2). None of the subjects were taking prescription or nonprescription drugs.

After an overnight fast, all subjects were studied in the supine resting position in the morning.

Measurements
Muscle Sympathetic Activity
Multiunit postganglionic MSA was recorded by microneurography in the peroneal nerve at the fibular head as previously described.25 26 27 The nerve signal was amplified (x50 000), filtered (bandpass, 500 to 2000 Hz), and fed through a discriminator for further noise reduction and audio monitoring (662C-3 Nerve Traffic Analysis System, University of Iowa, Bioengineering). A mean voltage (integrated) signal was obtained by passing the original signal through a resistance-capacitance circuit. MSA recording sites were accepted when burst amplitude was >=2x baseline noise and reproducible responses were obtained to challenges (apnea, 1 to 2 µg/kg IV sodium nitroprusside).

MSA bursts were counted and expressed as burst frequency (bursts/min) and burst incidence (bursts/100 heartbeats), the latter also accounting for differences or changes in heart rate. Furthermore, the area under the curve of each burst was calculated as an estimate for the number of activated sympathetic fibers, indicating the strength of a single burst.28 29 MSA total activity was calculated as the sum of burst areas and expressed in arbitrary units per minute.

Cardiovascular Variables
Heart rate was determined from the ECG (lead II; Sirecust 1281, Siemens). In opioid-addicted patients, radial arterial and central venous pressures were measured electromanometrically. In healthy volunteers, arterial blood pressure was measured by the volume-clamp method with a plethysmographic cuff placed around the middle phalanx of the third finger (Finapres 2300, Ohmeda) after determination of resting blood pressure by oscillometry in the ipsilateral upper arm. Compared with intra-arterial measurements, the volume-clamp method has been shown to provide reliable measurements of beat-by-beat changes in arterial blood pressure during a variety of test conditions.30 31

Catecholamine Plasma Concentrations
Norepinephrine and epinephrine plasma concentrations were determined with a Beckmann System Gold high-performance liquid chromatograph (HPLC) and electrochemical detection (Chromsystems No. 41,000). A catecholamine-detection kit (Chromsystems Catalog No. 5000) included a probe preparation system, HPLC column, and all necessary chemicals and buffers. The lower detection limit was 10 pg/mL for both epinephrine and norepinephrine, with a coefficient of variation of 6.2% for norepinephrine and 6.8% for epinephrine, respectively.

Data Recording and Processing
Analog variables (MSA, ECG, vascular pressures) were recorded on a thermoarray recorder (TA-11, Gould Instruments) and stored on tape (RD-125T DAT-Recorder, TEAC). Signals were simultaneously fed into a personal computer and digitized (sampling frequency: 200 Hz, DT2821, Data Translation). All analyses were performed with computer support (offline) with a dedicated program (Professor G. Wallin/T. Karlsson, Göteborg, Sweden).

Study Protocol
MSA and cardiovascular variables (averages of 5-minute periods) were determined in the awake state in both opioid-addicted patients and healthy volunteers. Antecubital venous blood was collected via indwelling catheters for determination of catecholamine plasma concentrations.

After a 30-minute resting period, anesthesia was induced in opioid-addicted patients by 2 to 4 mg/kg propofol (Klimofol, Ivamed) and 0.1 mg/kg cisatracurium (Nimbex, Glaxo-Wellcome). After intubation, patients were mechanically ventilated (FIO2, 0.21 to 0.3; positive end-expiratory pressure, 3 mm Hg). Anesthesia was maintained by propofol infusion (167±8 µg · kg-1 · min-1) as previously described.32 Ringer’s lactate was infused to keep central venous pressure at baseline values (7±2 mm Hg). Normocarbia was established and repeatedly confirmed by arterial blood gas analysis.

After steady-state conditions had been achieved, µ-opioid receptor blockade was started by 0.4 mg naloxone IV (Curamed). Four additional naloxone boluses of increasing dosage (0.8, 1.6, 3.2, and 6.4 mg) were injected at 15-minute intervals. Accordingly, a total of 12.4 mg naloxone was given over 60 minutes.32

MSA and cardiovascular variables (averages of 5-minute periods) were determined in the awake state, during anesthesia before opioid receptor blockade, and before each naloxone bolus, ie, at 15, 30, 45, 60, and 75 minutes. Simultaneously, radial arterial blood was collected for determination of catecholamine plasma concentrations.

Statistical Analysis
Data are expressed as mean±SEM. Differences in means of variables between patients and healthy volunteers were assessed by unpaired t tests. Differences in means of variables over time in opioid-addicted patients during detoxification were determined by 1-way repeated-measures ANOVA followed by the Duncan multiple range post hoc test.

The following a priori null hypotheses were tested: There is no difference in means of variables (1) in the awake state between opioid-addicted patients and healthy volunteers before detoxification and (2) after induction of anesthesia before administration of naloxone (a) compared with observations during µ-opioid receptor blockade and (b) compared with observations in the awake state. A null hypothesis was rejected with an {alpha}-error of <0.05.


*    Results
up arrowTop
 up arrowAbstract
 up arrowIntroduction
 up arrowMethods
 *Results
down arrowDiscussion
 down arrowReferences
 
Complete recordings of MSA were achieved in 10 of 15 patients. Six of these patients had not requested benzodiazepine premedication and were compared with healthy matched control subjects in the awake state. MSA data during µ-opioid receptor blockade are based on 10 patients, and other data are presented from all 15 patients.

Effects of Chronic µ-Opioid Receptor Stimulation on Resting MSA
Recordings from all unpremedicated patients and matched control subjects are shown in Figure 1Down. Patients with chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation showed a markedly decreased resting MSA (patients, 4±2 versus volunteers, 22±2 bursts/min, P<0.0001; Figure 2Down) despite similar heart rates (patients, 66±4 versus volunteers, 66±6 beats/min; P=0.9) and mean arterial pressures (patients, 89±4 versus volunteers, 88±5 mm Hg, P=0.9).



View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. Thirty-second recordings from 6 unpremedicated opioid-addicted patients and healthy matched volunteers demonstrating markedly decreased resting MSA in awake state during chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation. Bursts accepted for analysis are indicated by dots.



View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. Average resting MSA and catecholamine plasma concentrations in 6 unpremedicated opioid-addicted patients and 6 healthy matched control subjects. Chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation was associated with a marked parallel decrease in both MSA and norepinephrine plasma concentration.

Norepinephrine plasma concentration was lower (P=0.01) in opioid addicts. Epinephrine concentration was slightly but significantly (P=0.001) higher in patients with chronic opioid receptor stimulation (Figure 2Up).

Effects of µ-Opioid Receptor Blockade in Opioid-Addicted Patients
Reversal of chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation by naloxone during propofol anesthesia markedly increased MSA and arterial pressure (Figure 3Down).



View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. Recording from 1 patient with chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation of resting MSA in awake state (left), during propofol anesthesia (middle), and after µ-opioid receptor blockade (right). Bursts accepted for analysis are indicated by dots. Starting from a low MSA both in awake state (left) and during anesthesia (middle), resting MSA is markedly augmented by µ-opioid receptor blockade (right).

On average, µ-opioid receptor blockade evoked a significant and dose-dependent increase in MSA (by 380%) from 5±2 bursts/min during anesthesia before naloxone to 24±3 bursts/min (MSA burst incidence, 12±3 to 29±5 bursts/100 heartbeats). Maximum effects were observed after a total dose of 2.8 mg naloxone, and MSA was not increased further by additional naloxone (Figure 4Down).



View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 4. MSA (burst frequency, burst incidence, and total activity) in opioid-addicted patients in awake state (open circles), during propofol anesthesia (semiopen circles), and during µ-opioid receptor blockade with naloxone (solid circles). Starting from a low MSA during both awake state and anesthesia, µ-opioid receptor blockade with naloxone increased MSA, reaching a maximum after 2.8 mg naloxone had been administered. No further effects were observed with additional naloxone.

In parallel to the observed MSA increase, arterial norepinephrine plasma concentration increased to a maximum of 305±48 pg/mL, and epinephrine increased to 492±67 pg/mL (Figure 5Down).



View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 5. Arterial norepinephrine and epinephrine plasma concentrations in opioid-addicted patients in awake state (open circles), during propofol anesthesia (semiopen circles), and during µ-opioid receptor blockade with naloxone (solid circles). Starting from low norepinephrine and epinephrine plasma concentrations during both awake state and anesthesia, µ-opioid receptor blockade markedly increased norepinephrine and epinephrine plasma concentrations paralleling MSA increase.

Sympathetic activation by µ-opioid receptor blockade was associated with significant increases in systolic arterial pressure (116±5 to 153±5 mm Hg), diastolic arterial pressure (63±3 to 83±3 mm Hg), and heart rate (70±3 to 86±4 beats/min).

No complications were observed, and all patients were transferred to the ward the next morning.


*    Discussion
up arrowTop
 up arrowAbstract
 up arrowIntroduction
 up arrowMethods
 up arrowResults
 *Discussion
down arrowReferences
 
In humans addicted to opioids for almost 10 years, MSA and norepinephrine plasma concentration at rest were decreased compared with those of healthy control subjects despite similar arterial blood pressure and heart rate. µ-Opioid receptor blockade by naloxone increased MSA and catecholamine plasma concentrations even beyond awake values despite maintained propofol anesthesia that unmasked the effects of chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation.

Critique of Methods
A particular strength of this study is that we assessed patients addicted exclusively to opioids for many years, ruling out drug interactions.

Results describing opioid effects on resting MSA are based on 6 unpremedicated addicted patients and 6 healthy volunteers. For assessment of effects of µ-opioid receptor blockade, a larger sample was available by pooling data from unpremedicated patients and patients requesting a small dose of flunitrazepam in the morning, because no significant differences were observed between patients receiving premedication and those who did not.

Mean MSA at rest in our volunteer control group corresponds very well to values obtained in larger cohorts of similar age.25 26 27 28 33 Thus, despite a small sample size, results provide valid information comparing opioid-addicted patients with healthy individuals.

Certainly, it would have been of interest to assess the effects of opioid receptor blockade in awake addicted patients. However, opioid receptor blockade in addicts cannot be performed without additional medications, because a severe withdrawal syndrome would immediately be precipitated. Therefore, anesthesia with propofol has been proposed for detoxification when opioid receptors are acutely blocked.32 34

Propofol anesthesia decreased MSA by 70%.35 36 A similar effect was determined in our addicted patients. Because propofol was administered by a constant high-dose infusion throughout the observational period, the observed increase in MSA evoked by opioid receptor blockade may be considered to be even more pronounced in the awake state.

Interpretation of Results
Although the effects of endogenous opioids on heart and circulation have gained substantial importance, in particular in patients with CHF, only very limited data addressing potential cardiovascular effects of chronic opioid receptor stimulation are available. In patients with CHF and in animal models of CHF, plasma concentrations of endogenous opioid peptides are significantly increased.19 20 21 22 23 Moreover, naloxone administration during CHF prevents attenuation of the inotropic response to adrenergic stimulation, antagonizes baroreflex depression, and improves cardiac output.19 20 21 22 23 Thus, chronic opioid receptor stimulation by endogenous ligands may dampen excessive sympathetic stimulation of the cardiovascular system.37 Accordingly, during chronic opioid receptor agonist stimulation, antagonist administration may unmask these effects on cardiovascular control.

Previously, the effects of chronic opioid receptor stimulation on cardiovascular regulation have not been assessed in humans.

In volunteers at rest, the effects on the sympathetic and cardiovascular systems of endogenous µ-opioid receptor agonists apparently play only a small role, if any, as demonstrated by the absence of effects evoked by µ-opioid receptor antagonists. In fact, even large doses of naloxone (10 mg IV) do not alter resting MSA, sympathetic baroreflex sensitivity, catecholamine plasma concentrations, arterial pressure, or heart rate.12 13 14 15 16 In contrast, naloxone potentiates the increase in MSA during exercise and in response to lower-body negative pressure, indicating an inhibition of MSA by endogenous opioids during states of sympathetic activation.15 17 18

In anesthetized animals, opioid agonists generally decrease sympathetic activity. In anesthetized dogs and cats, fentanyl (5 to 50 µg/kg IV) decreases splanchnic nerve activity and catecholamine plasma concentrations3 4 6 7 9 and inhibits baroreflex responses.38 In awake humans, however, the effects of opioid receptor agonists are less clear, because associated respiratory depression and/or an altered state of consciousness can hardly be controlled for. Under these conditions, opioid receptor agonists even increased urine and plasma catecholamine concentrations.5 10 In contrast, fentanyl (2.5 to 5 µg/kg IV) did not change MSA when given to awake premedicated patients and unpremedicated volunteers.8 11

In contrast to the absence of sympathetic inhibition by acute opioid administration in humans, chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation by methadone in our patients was associated with decreased MSA and norepinephrine plasma concentration compared with those of healthy control subjects. Our observations may be explained by opioid agonist effects on the activity of central sympathetic neurons, peripheral sympathetic efferent neurons, or baroreceptor afferents.

The major part of cardiovascular sympathetic premotor neurons are located in the rostral ventral medulla, caudal raphe nuclei, and in the vicinity of the fourth cerebral ventricle, with the nucleus tractus solitarius believed to be the key component for central processing of cardiovascular afferent input.39 Other neuronal groups, eg, located in the locus coeruleus, are capable of markedly influencing sympathetic cardiovascular function.39 Injection of morphine into the nucleus tractus solitarius in anesthetized rabbits as well as perfusion of fentanyl through the fourth cerebral ventricle in conscious dogs indicated inhibitory effects of opioid receptor agonists on central baroreflex processing.40 41 When morphine was given systemically to rats, locus coeruleus neural activity decreased.42 Thus, inhibition of several components of central sympathetic pathways may contribute to the observed effects of chronic opioid receptor stimulation on MSA in opioid-addicted patients.

Our results may also be explained by peripheral mechanisms. Opioid receptors are present on peripheral sympathetic neurons and sympathetic ganglia.43 In anesthetized dogs, basal adrenal catecholamine output is unaffected by intravenous naloxone, but systemic morphine administration decreases adrenal epinephrine release evoked by splanchnic nerve stimulation.43 Furthermore, celiac ganglionic neural discharge and superior cervical ganglionic acetylcholine release are decreased by local administration of the opioid receptor ligand methionine-enkephalin, indicating inhibition of sympathetic ganglionic transmission to multiple organ systems.44 45

The mechanism for increased epinephrine plasma concentration during chronic opioid administration in our patients remains unclear. Possibly, adrenal epinephrine release is less sensitive to the inhibitory effects of chronic opioid agonist administration or, in contrast to the decrease in MSA, shows a compensatory increase.

µ-Opioid receptor blockade in our patients reversed the inhibitory effects of chronic opioid receptor stimulation. Thus, we are able to confirm in the same patients that decreased MSA during chronic opioid administration is mediated by opioid receptor–related mechanisms. Because naloxone exerts no effects in healthy volunteers,12 13 14 the observed sympathetic activation after naloxone relates to opioid receptor blockade with the background of a chronically stimulated opioid receptor system and is not evoked by naloxone per se. Finally, our results raise the question why, in contrast to regulation of breathing, cardiovascular sympathetic regulation apparently does not adapt to chronic opioid receptor stimulation.

In summary, chronic µ-opioid receptor stimulation decreases MSA and norepinephrine plasma concentration despite unchanged arterial pressure and heart rate. µ-Opioid receptor blockade in patients with chronic opioid abuse unmasks these effects, resulting in markedly increased MSA.


*    Acknowledgments
 
This study was supported by a grant from the German Research Council (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft: Ki 629/2-1) to Drs Kienbaum and Peters.

Received August 9, 2000; revision received October 4, 2000; accepted October 4, 2000.


*    References
up arrowTop
 up arrowAbstract
 up arrowIntroduction
 up arrowMethods
 up arrowResults
 up arrowDiscussion
 *References
 

  1. Atweh SF, Kuhar MJ. Distribution and physiological significance of opioid receptors in the brain. Br Med Bull. 1983;39:47–52.[Free Full Text]
  2. Thorén P, Floras JS, Hoffmann P, et al. Endorphins and exercise: physiological mechanisms and clinical implication. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1990;22:417–428.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Laubie M, Schmitt H, Canellas J, et al. Centrally mediated bradycardia and hypotension induced by narcotic analgesics: dextromoramide and fentanyl. Eur J Pharmacol. 1974;28:66–75.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Daskalopoulos NT, Laubie M, Schmitt H. Localization of the central sympatho-inhibitory effect of a narcotic analgesic agent, fentanyl, in cats. Eur J Pharmacol. 1975;33:91–97.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Liu W-S, Bidwai AV, Lunn JK, et al. Urine catecholamine excretion after large doses of fentanyl, fentanyl and diazepam, and fentanyl, diazepam, and pancuronium. Can Anaesth Soc J. 1977;24:371–379.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Flacke JW, Flacke WE, Bloor BC, et al. Effects of fentanyl, naloxone, and clonidine on hemodynamics and plasma catecholamine levels in dogs. Anesth Analg. 1983;62:305–313.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Flacke JW, Davis J, Flacke EW, et al. Effects of fentanyl and diazepam in dogs deprived of autonomic tone. Anesth Analg. 1985;64:1053–1059.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Sellgren J, Pontén J, Wallin BG. Characteristics of muscle nerve sympathetic activity during general anaesthesia in humans. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1992;36:336–345.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Taneyama C, Goto H, Kohno N, et al. Effects of fentanyl, diazepam, and the combination of both on arterial baroreflex and sympathetic nerve activity in intact and baro-denervated dogs. Anesth Analg. 1993;77:44–48.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Hoehe M, Duka T. Opiates increase plasma catecholamines in humans. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1993;18:141–148.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Pacentine GG, Muzi M, Ebert TJ. Effects of fentanyl on sympathetic activation associated with administration of desflurane. Anesthesiology. 1995;82:823–831.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Estilo AE, Cottrell JE. Hemodynamics and catecholamine changes after administration of naloxone. Anesth Analg. 1982;61:349–353.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Rubin PC, McLean K, Reid JL. Endogenous opioids and baroreflex control in humans. Hypertension. 1983;5:535–538.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. McMurray RG, Newbould E, Bouloux P, et al. High-dose naloxone modifies cardiovascular and neuroendocrine function in ambulant subjects. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1991;16:447–455.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  15. Schobel HP, Oren RM, Mark AL, et al. Naloxone potentiates cardiopulmonary baroreflex sympathetic control in normal humans. Circ Res. 1992;70:172–183.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Hara K, Senn BM, Floras JS. Evaluation of acute haemodynamic response to high-dose naloxone in young hypertensive and normotensive humans. Clin Invest Med. 1995;18:108–113.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Hara K, Floras JS. Effects of naloxone on hemodynamics and sympathetic activity after exercise. J Appl Physiol. 1992;73:2028–2035.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Farrel PA, Ebert TJ, Kampine JP. Naloxone augments muscle sympathetic nerve activity during isometric exercise in humans. Am J Physiol. 1991;260:E379–E388.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Liang C-S, Imai N, Stone CK, et al. The role of endogenous opioids in congestive heart failure: effects of nalmefene on systemic and regional hemodynamics in dogs. Circulation. 1987;75:443–451.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Sakamoto S, Stone CK, Woolf PD, et al. Opiate receptor antagonism in right-sided congestive heart failure: naloxone exerts salutary hemodynamic effects through its action on the central nervous system. Circ Res. 1989;65:103–114.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Yatani A, Imai N, Himura Y, et al. Chronic opiate-receptor inhibition in experimental congestive heart failure in dogs. Am J Physiol. 1997;272:H478–H484.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Kawashima S, Fukutake N, Nishian K, et al. Elevated plasma beta-endorphin levels in patients with congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17:53–58.[Abstract]
  23. Fontana F, Bernardi P, Pich EM, et al. Relationship between plasma atrial natriuretic factor and opioid peptide levels in healthy subjects and in patients with acute congestive heart failure. Eur Heart J. 1993;13:219–225.
  24. Florez J, Hurle MA. Opioids in respiration and vomiting. In: Herz A, ed. Opioids II, Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, Vol. 104. New York, NY: Springer; 1993:263–292.
  25. Sundlöf G, Wallin BG. The variability of muscle nerve sympathetic activity in resting recumbent man. J Physiol. 1977;272:383–397.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Vallbo AB, Hagbarth KE, Torebjörk HE, et al. Somatosensory, proprioceptive, and sympathetic activity in human peripheral nerves. Physiol Rev. 1979;59:919–957.[Free Full Text]
  27. Kienbaum P, Heuter T, Michel MC, et al. Racemic ketamine decreases muscle sympathetic activity but maintains the neural response to hypotensive challenges in humans. Anesthesiology. 2000;92:94–101.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Wallin BG, Elam M. Insights from intraneural recordings of sympathetic nerve traffic in humans. News Physiological Sci. 1994;9:203–207.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. McAllen RM, Malpas SC. Sympathetic burst activity: characteristics and significance. Clin Exp Pharm Physiol. 1997;24:791–799.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Parati G, Casadei R, Groppelli A, et al: Comparison of finger and intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring at rest and during laboratory testing. Hypertension. 1989;13:647–655.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Imholz BPM, Settels JJ, van der Meiracker AH, et al. Non-invasive continuous finger blood pressure measurement during orthostatic stress compared to intra-arterial pressure. Cardiovasc Res. 1990;24:214–221.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Kienbaum P, Scherbaum N, Thürauf N, et al. Acute detoxification of opioid addicted patients during propofol or methohexital anesthesia: a comparison of withdrawal symptoms, neuroendocrine, metabolic, and cardiovascular patterns. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:969–976.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  33. Noll G, Wenzel RR, Schneider M, et al. Increased activation of sympathetic nervous system and endothelin by mental stress in normotensive offspring of hypertensive parents. Circulation. 1996;93:866–869.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. O’Connor PG, Kosten TR. Rapid and ultrarapid opioid detoxification techniques. JAMA. 1998;279:229–234.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Ebert TJ, Muzi M. Propofol and autonomic reflex function in humans. Anesth Analg. 1994;78:369–375.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  36. Sellgren J, Ejnell H, Elam M, et al. Sympathetic muscle nerve activity, peripheral blood flows, and baroreceptor reflexes in humans during propofol anesthesia and surgery. Anesthesiology. 1994;80:534–544.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  37. Leimbach WN, Wallin BG, Victor RG, et al. Direct evidence from intraneural recordings for increased central sympathetic outflow in patients with heart failure. Circulation. 1986;73:913–914.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Lennander O, Henriksson BA, Martner J, et al. Effects of fentanyl, nitrous oxide, or both on baroreceptor reflex regulation in the cat. Br J Anaesth. 1996;77:399–403.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Dampney RAL. Functional organization of central pathways regulating the cardiovascular system. Physiol Rev. 1994;74:323–364.[Free Full Text]
  40. Wang Q, Li P. Inhibition of baroreflex following microinjection of GABA or morphine into the nucleus tractus solitarii in rabbits. J Auton Nerv Syst. 1988;25:162–172.
  41. Freye E, Arndt JO. Perfusion of the fourth cerebral ventricle with fentanyl induces naloxone-reversible bradycardia, hypotension, and EEG synchronisation in conscious dogs. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 1979;18:123–128.
  42. Aghajanian GK. Tolerance of locus coeruleus neurones to morphine and suppression of withdrawal responses by clonidine. Nature. 1978;276:186–188.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  43. Kimura T, Katoh M, Satoh S. Inhibition by opioid agonists and enhancement by antagonists of the release of catecholamines from the dog adrenal gland in response to splanchnic nerve stimulation: evidence for the functional role of opioid receptors. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1988;244:1098–1102.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Horiuchi J, Terada N, Takeuchi T. Opioid receptor modulation of neural transmission in the rabbit coeliac ganglion and ganglionic opioid receptor activation by binitrolol. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 1989;15(suppl):103–107.
  45. Zhang C, Bachoo M, Morales M, et al. The site of the inhibitory action of endogenous opioids in the superior cervical ganglion of the cat. Brain Res. 1995;683:59–64.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
D. Cozzolino, F. C. Sasso, D. Cataldo, D. Gruosso, A. Giammarco, A. Cavalli, C. Di Maggio, G. Renzo, T. Salvatore, D. Giugliano, et al.
Acute Pressor and Hormonal Effects of {beta}-Endorphin at High Doses in Healthy and Hypertensive Subjects: Role of Opioid Receptor Agonism
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., September 1, 2005; 90(9): 5167 - 5174.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
P. Kienbaum, J. Peters, N. Scherbaum, P. F. White, and R. H. Wender
Convincing Effects of Clonidine on Neurohumoral Withdrawal Symptoms During Antagonist-Supported Detoxification of Opioid Addicts * Response
Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2003; 97(5): 1547 - 1548.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kienbaum, P.
Right arrow Articles by Peters, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kienbaum, P.
Right arrow Articles by Peters, J.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Compound via MeSH
*Substance via MeSH
Hazardous Substances DB
*EPINEPHRINE
*METHADONE
*NALOXONE
Related Collections
Right arrow Cardiovascular Pharmacology
Right arrow Autonomic, reflex, and neurohumoral control of circulation

Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search
Copyright © 2001 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited.