Spinal effects of four injectable anaesthetics on nociceptive reflexes in rats: a comparison of electrophysiological and behavioural measurements.

1. To assess the direct spinal contributions to the depression of reflexes caused by general anaesthetics, the intravenous potency of four injectable anaesthetics has been compared in two preparations: in decerebrate, spinalised rats, using a novel preparation requiring little surgical intervention, and in intact rats with chronically implanted i.v. cannulae. 2. Methohexitone (1-8 mg kg-1 i.v.), alphaxalone/alphadolone (0.5-8 mg kg-1 i.v.), alpha-chloralose (20-80 mg kg-1 i.v.) and ketamine (0.5-16 mg kg-1 i.v.) all produced a dose-dependent depression of single motor unit activity evoked by controlled noxious mechanical stimuli in decerebrate, spinalised animals. 3. The sedative and motor effects brought about by equivalent doses to those used in the electrophysiological experiments were assessed in intact rats. Methohexitone, alphaxalone/alphadolone and alpha-chloralose all caused similar levels of behavioural sedation at the doses that caused depression of spinal reflexes. Ketamine required relatively much higher doses to cause sedation. 4. To determine whether background anaesthesia modulated the potency with which these compounds affected spinal reflex activity, depressant effects in decerebrate, unanaesthetized rats were compared with those in animals maintained under anaesthesia with either alpha-chloralose or the steroid mixture of alphaxalone/alphadolone. The presence of either of these two agents as maintenance anaesthetics did not influence the effectiveness with which other compounds depressed nociceptive responses. However, additional doses of the maintenance anaesthetics were less effective than the same doses tested in decerebrate animals. 5. All the anaesthetics tested produced a significant depression of spinal reflex responses to noxious stimuli at doses well below those required for anaesthesia. Whilst the presence of maintenance anaesthetics appears not to distort pharmacological tests of other agents, there may nonetheless be a biasing of the samples of cells recorded.