This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Moursi, M. M. Articles by D'Alecy, L. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Moursi, M. M. Articles by D'Alecy, L. G.

Stroke, Vol 14, 791-796, Copyright © 1983 by American Heart Association

ARTICLES

The role of ethanol in diluents of drugs that protect mice from hypoxia

MM Moursi, BA Luyckx and LG D'Alecy

This study evaluates the hypothesis that ethanol alone, or in diluents for drugs used to protect hypoxic mice, is responsible in part for an increased tolerance to hypoxia (4-5% oxygen). The change in hypoxic tolerance following i.v. or i.p. administration of ethanol, diazepam, nimodipine and various diluent components was measured. Diazepam (50 mg/kg i.v.) increased hypoxic tolerance to 700 +/- 47% (n = 11) of saline control, its diluent increased hypoxic tolerance to 468 +/- 60% (n = 10) of saline control but the ethanol component of the diluent accounted for almost half of this diluent effect. Nimodipine (2 mg/kg i.p.), a calcium antagonist, increased tolerance to 180 +/- 18% of control (n = 19) and nimodipine diluent showed an even greater increase to 226 +/- 25% of control (n = 15). In this case essentially all of the protective effect of nimodipine diluent (81.3%) is accounted for by ethanol. Dose response curves indicate the maximum ethanol induced increase in hypoxic tolerance was approximately 335% of control at a dose of 2.4 g/kg. Buffers, etc. in the diluents evidently add to the protective effect of ethanol. Our data clearly indicate ethanol is the important component of some treatments which protect mice from hypoxia. The pharmacological activity of ethanol, even when used in a diluent, should not be ignored in evaluating therapeutic intervention for protection from hypoxia.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. F. Zwemer, M. Y. Song, K. A. Carello, and L. G. D'Alecy Strain differences in response to acute hypoxia: CD-1 versus C57BL/6J mice J Appl Physiol, January 1, 2007; 102(1): 286 - 293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]