Pierce V, Shepperson N B, Todd M H, Waterfall J F
Br J Pharmacol. 1986 Feb;87(2):433-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1986.tb10834.x.
The cardioregulatory properties of the alpha 1-adrenoceptor blocker indoramin have been compared with those of prazosin in the anaesthetized rat. The effects of autonomic blockade on heart rate responses evoked by these two agents and their effects on blood pressure and heart rate after peripheral or central administration have been compared. Cumulative administration of indoramin (0.8-25.6 mg kg-1 i.v.) evoked significant decreases in arterial blood pressure and a concomitant bradycardia. Pithing or autonomic blockade, by pretreatment with a combination of practolol and bilateral vagotomy, prevented the bradycardia evoked by indoramin (0.8-3.2 mg kg-1 i.v.). Atropine sulphate pretreatment abolished the bradycardia until a cumulative dose of 25.6 mg kg-1(i.v.) of indoramin had been reached. Bilateral vagotomy, intravenous administration of atropine methylnitrate or practolol pretreatment attenuated the bradycardia. Prazosin (0.02-0.64 mg kg-1 i.v.) evoked a fall in arterial blood pressure of similar magnitude to that observed following indoramin. A bradycardia was evoked only at a relatively high dose (0.64 mg kg-1 i.v.). Intracisternal injection of indoramin or prazosin evoked bradycardia and hypotension at a dose which had no effect after intravenous injection (25 micrograms). Intracerebroventricular injection of indoramin (25 micrograms) had no significant effect on heart rate or blood pressure compared to control values, whereas prazosin (25 micrograms) evoked a significant tachycardia and hypotension. It is concluded that the bradycardia evoked by indoramin in the rat is not due to a direct action on the heart except possibly at high doses. Central alpha 1-adrenoceptor blockade, possibly in the brainstem region, results in a bradycardia and this may explain the lack of reflex tachycardia following the administration of indoramin.
在麻醉大鼠中,已将α1-肾上腺素能受体阻滞剂吲哚拉明的心脏调节特性与哌唑嗪的特性进行了比较。比较了自主神经阻滞对这两种药物诱发的心率反应的影响,以及它们在外周或中枢给药后对血压和心率的影响。累积静脉注射吲哚拉明(0.8 - 25.6 mg kg-1)可引起动脉血压显著下降,并伴有心动过缓。通过普萘洛尔和双侧迷走神经切断术联合预处理进行脊髓毁损或自主神经阻滞,可预防吲哚拉明(0.8 - 3.2 mg kg-1静脉注射)诱发的心动过缓。硫酸阿托品预处理可消除心动过缓,直至达到吲哚拉明累积剂量25.6 mg kg-1(静脉注射)。双侧迷走神经切断术、静脉注射甲基硝酸阿托品或普萘洛尔预处理可减轻心动过缓。哌唑嗪(0.02 - 0.64 mg kg-1静脉注射)引起的动脉血压下降幅度与吲哚拉明给药后观察到的相似。仅在相对高剂量(0.64 mg kg-1静脉注射)时才诱发心动过缓。脑池内注射吲哚拉明或哌唑嗪在静脉注射无效的剂量(25微克)时可诱发心动过缓和低血压。与对照值相比,脑室内注射吲哚拉明(25微克)对心率或血压无显著影响,而哌唑嗪(25微克)可诱发显著的心动过速和低血压。结论是,除了可能在高剂量时,吲哚拉明在大鼠中诱发的心动过缓并非由于对心脏的直接作用。中枢α1-肾上腺素能受体阻滞,可能在脑干区域,导致心动过缓,这可能解释了吲哚拉明给药后缺乏反射性心动过速的现象。