Advertisement

Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology

, Volume 329, Issue 2, pp 176–181 | Cite as

Interaction of the neuromuscular blocking drugs alcuronium, decamethonium, gallamine, pancuronium, ritebronium, tercuronium and d-tubocurarine with muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in the heart and ileum

  • J. Nedoma
  • N. A. Dorofeeva
  • S. Tuček
  • S. A. Shelkovnikov
  • A. F. Danilov
Article

Summary

  1. 1.

    Neuromuscular blocking drugs have a high affinity for muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in the heart atria and ileal smooth muscle. In experiments on homogenates, alcuronium, gallamine, pancuronium, tercuronium and ritebronium inhibited the binding of the muscarinic antagonist (3H)quinuclidinyl, benzilate (QNB) to rat heart atria with IC50 values of 0.15–0.53 μmol · l−1 and to ileal longitudinal muscles with IC50 values of 0.12–0.45 μmol · l−1. d-Tubocurarine and decamethonium inhibited (3H)QNB binding to these tissues with IC50 values of 6.2–8.5 μmol · l−1.

     
  2. 2.

    For each neuromuscular blocking drug, the IC50 values were virtually identical for (3H)QNB displacement in the homogenates of the atria and of the ileal muscle.

     
  3. 3.

    Alcuronium and gallamine differed from the other blocking agents in that they produced less steep (3H)QNB displacement curves both in the atria and the ileal muscle; Hill coefficients for the binding of alcuronium and gallamine to atrial and ileal homogenates were lower than unity.

     
  4. 4.

    On isolated atria, gallamine, pancuronium, ritebronium and tercuronium antagonized the inhibition of tension development caused by the muscarinic agonist, methylfurmethide, with Kd values which were of the same order of magnitude as the IC50 values for the displacement of (3H)QNB binding to homogenates; the Kd of alcuronium was 12.5 times higher. d-Tubocurarine and decamethonium did not antagonize the effects of methylfurmethide at concentrations up to 100 μmol · l−1.

     
  5. 5.

    On isolated ileal longitudinal muscle, gallamine and pancuronium antagonized the effects of methylfurmethide with Kd values that were 53 times and 100 times higher than their respective Kd values in the atria. Alcuronium, d-tubocurarine and decamethonium at concentrations of up to 100 μmol · l−1 did not antagonize the effects of methylfurmethide. Pharmacologically determined Kd values of gallamine and pancuronium were 129 times and 83 times higher in the isolated ileal muscle than were their respective IC50 values for (3H)QNB displacement in ileal homogenates.

     
  6. 6.

    The results indicate that there is a high degree of cardioselectivity in the antimuscarinic action of gallamine, pancuronium and alcuronium, whilst with ritebronium and tercuronium there is little difference between the action on the atria and ileal muscle. The cardioselectivity of gallamine, pancuronium and alcuronium is in a sharp contrast to their equal binding to the homogenates of the atria and ileal smooth muscle. The discrepancy between the binding and pharmacological effect in the ileum suggests that, at low concentrations, gallamine, pancuronium and alcuronium bind to muscarinic receptors in the ileal smooth muscle in such a way that they interfere with the binding of (3H)QNB but not with that of methylfurmethide; the same applies to the binding of d-tuborurarine and decamethonium to muscarinic receptors both in the atria and the ileum. An alternative possibility is that the affinity of muscarinic receptors for neuromuscular blockers is low in intact smooth muscle cells but increases strongly after homogenization.

     

Key words

Acetylcholine receptors (heart) Acethlcholine receptors (ileum) Muscarinic receptors (heart) Muscarinic receptors (ileum) Neuromuscular blockers on muscarinic receptors Alcuronium Decamethonium Gallamine Pancuronium Ritebronium Tercuronium d-Tubocurarine 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ambache N (1954) Separation of the longitudinal muscle of the rabbit's ileum as a broad sheet. J Physiol 125:53P-54PGoogle Scholar
  2. Bray GA (1960) A simple efficient liquid scintillator for counting aqueous solutions in a liquid scintillation counter. Anal Biochem 1:279–285Google Scholar
  3. Brown BH, Crout JR (1970) The sympathomimetic effect of gallamine on the heart. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 172:266–273Google Scholar
  4. Clark AL, Mitchelson F (1976) The inhibitory effect, of gallamine on muscarinic receptors. Br J Pharmacol 58:323–331Google Scholar
  5. Dalton DW, Tyers MB (1982) A comparison of the muscarinic antagonist actions of pancuronium and alcuronium. J Auton Pharmacol 2:261–266Google Scholar
  6. Danilov AF, Malygin VV, Starshinova LA, Khromov-Borisov NV, Torf SF, Cherepanova VP (1979) Tercuronium — a new nondepolarizing myorelaxant with a high activity and selectivity. Farmakol Toksikol (Moscow) 42:478–481Google Scholar
  7. Dunlap J, Brown JH (1983) Heterogeneity of binding sites on cardiac muscarinic receptors induced by the neuromuscular blocking agents gallamine and pancuronium. Mol Pharmacol 24:15–22Google Scholar
  8. Edinburgh Staff (1970) Pharmacological experiments on isolated preparations. Churchill Livingstone, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellis J, Hoss W (1982) Competitive interaction of gallamine with multiple muscarinic receptors. Biochem Pharmacol 31:873–876Google Scholar
  10. Gaddum JH (1957) Theories of drug antagonism. Pharmacol Rev 9:211–218Google Scholar
  11. Hedlund B, Grynfarb M, Bartfai T (1982) Two ligands may bind simultaneously to the muscarine receptor. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Arch Pharmacol 320:3–13Google Scholar
  12. Kharkevich DA, Shorr BA (1983) Specific features of the action of curare-like drugs on m-cholinoreceptors in different organs. In: Kharkevich DA (ed) New myorelaxants (in Russian). Medicina, Moscow, pp 47–64Google Scholar
  13. Leung E, Mitchelson F (1982) The interaction of pancuronium with cardiac and ileal muscarinic receptors. Eur J Pharmacol 80:1–9Google Scholar
  14. Loeb JM, de Tarnowsky JM, Johnsen JA (1982) Differential cholinergic sensitivity of sinus and AV nodes. Eur J Pharmacol 83:321–324Google Scholar
  15. Lüllmann H, Ohnesorge FR, Schauwecker G-C, Wassermann O (1969) Inhibition of the actions of carbachol and DFP on guinea pig isolated atria by alkane-ammonium compounds. Eur J Pharmacol 6:241–247Google Scholar
  16. Marshall IG (1973) The ganglion blocking and vagolytic actions of three short-acting neuromuscular blocking drugs in the cat. J Pharmacol 25:530–536Google Scholar
  17. Marshall RJ, Ojewole JAO (1979) Comparison of the autonomic effects of some currently-used neuromuscular blocking agents. Br J Pharmacol 66:77P-78PGoogle Scholar
  18. Mitchelson F (1984) Heterogeneity in muscarinic receptors: evidence from pharmacologic studies with antagonists. In: Subtypes of muscarinic receptors, January 1984 Supplement to Trends Pharmacol Sci, pp 12–16Google Scholar
  19. Nathanson NM (1983) Binding of agonists and antagonists to muscarinic acetylcholine receptors on intact cultured heart cells. J Neurochem 41:1545–1549Google Scholar
  20. Rang HP (1964) Stimulant action of volatile anaesthetics on smooth muscle. Br J Pharmacol Chemother 22:356–365Google Scholar
  21. Rathbun FJ, Hamilton JT (1970) Effect of gallamine on cholinergic receptors. Can Anaesth Soc J 17:574–589Google Scholar
  22. Riker WF, Wescoe WC (1951) The pharmacology of Flaxedil, with observations on certain analogs. Ann NY Acad Sci 54:373–392Google Scholar
  23. Stockton JM, Birdsall NJM, Burgen ASV, Hulme EC (1983) Modification of the binding properties of muscarinic receptors by gallamine. Mol Pharmacol 23:551–557Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Nedoma
    • 1
  • N. A. Dorofeeva
    • 2
  • S. Tuček
    • 1
  • S. A. Shelkovnikov
    • 2
  • A. F. Danilov
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of PhysiologyCzechoslovak Academy of SciencesPragueCzechoslovakia
  2. 2.Sechenov Institute of Evolutionary Physiology and BiochemistryUSSR Academy of SciencesLeningradUSSR

Personalised recommendations