Evidence for the gastric cytoprotective effect of centrally injected agmatine

Agmatine (decarboxylated arginine) exerts cytoprotective action in several tissues, such as in the brain, heart or kidneys, but there is still controversy over the effects of agmatine on the gastric mucosa. The aim of the present study was to reveal the potential gastroprotective action of agmatine by using an acid-independent ulcer model to clarify which receptors and peripheral factors are involved in it. Gastric mucosal damage was induced by acidified ethanol. Mucosal levels of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and somatostatin were determined by radioimmunoassay. For analysis of gastric motor activity the rubber balloon method was used. It was found that agmatine given intracerebroventricularly (i.c.v., 0.044-220nmol/rat) significantly inhibited the development of ethanol-induced mucosal damage, while in the case of intraperitoneal injection (0.001-50mg/kg i.p.) it had only a minor effect. The central gastroprotective action of agmatine was completely antagonized by mixed alpha2-adrenoceptor and imidazoline I1 receptor antagonists (idazoxan, efaroxan), but only partially by yohimbine (selective alpha2-adrenoceptor antagonist) and AGN 192403 (selective I1 receptor ligand, putative antagonist). It was also inhibited by the non-selective opioid-receptor antagonist naloxone and the selective δ-opioid receptor antagonist naltrindole, but not by β-funaltrexamine and nor-Binaltorphimine (selective μ- and κ-opioid receptor antagonists, respectively). Furthermore, the effect of agmatine was antagonized by bilateral cervical vagotomy and by pretreatment with indomethacin and NG-nitro-l-arginine. Agmatine also reversed the ethanol-induced reduction of gastric mucosal CGRP and somatostatin content, but did not have any significant effect on gastric motor activity. These results indicate that agmatine given centrally induces gastric cytoprotection, which is mediated by central imidazoline I1 receptors, alpha2-adrenoceptors and δ-opioid receptors. Activation of these receptors induces the release of different mucosal protective factors, such as NO, prostaglandins, CGRP and somatostatin by a vagal-dependent mechanism. Alterations of gastric motility are not likely to contribute to the observed protective effect

In vivo measurement of intragastric pressure with a rubber balloon in the anesthetized rat.

The protocols described in this unit are designed to measure the intragastric pressure in anesthetized rats by a water-filled low-compliance rubber balloon. The balloon is introduced into the stomach either orally (by passing the balloon down the esophagus) or directly via a small incision of the fundus after laparotomy. The effects of both stimulatory (e.g., carbachol) and inhibitory (e.g., oxymetazoline) agents can be evaluated on the gastric tone and phasic contractions. The model allows the evaluation of dose-response curves and also the time-course of the effects. Furthermore, by combining centrally or peripherally acting agents the site of action can also be determined. Curr. Protoc. Toxicol. 57:21.12.1-21.12.11. (c) 2013 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc

Brain neuropeptides in gastric mucosal protection.

The centrally induced gastroprotective effect of neuropeptides has been intensively studied. Besides many similarities, however, differences can also be observed in their gastroprotective actions. The gastroprotective dose-response curve proved to be either sigmoid, or bell-shaped. Additional gastrointestinal effects of neuropeptides can contribute to their mucosal protective effect. Part of the neuropeptides induces gastroprotection by peripheral administration as well. Besides vagal nerve the sympathetic nervous system may also be involved in conveying the central effect to the periphery. Better understanding of the complex mechanism of the maintenance of gastric mucosal integrity may result in the development of new strategy to enhance gastric mucosal resistance against injury

Role of cannabinoids in gastrointestinal mucosal defense and inflammation.

Modulating the activity of the endocannabinoid system influences various gastrointestinal physiological and pathophysiological processes, and cannabinoid receptors as well as regulatory enzymes responsible for the synthesis or degradation of endocannabinoids represent potential targets to reduce the development of gastrointestinal mucosal lesions, hemorrhage and inflammation. Direct activation of CB1 receptors by plant-derived, endogenous or synthetic cannabinoids effectively reduces both gastric acid secretion and gastric motor activity, and decreases the formation of gastric mucosal lesions induced by stress, pylorus ligation, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or alcohol, partly by peripheral, partly by central mechanisms. Similarly, indirect activation of cannabinoid receptors through elevation of endocannabinoid levels by globally acting or peripherally restricted inhibitors of their metabolizing enzymes (FAAH, MAGL) or by inhibitors of their cellular uptake reduced the gastric mucosal lesions induced by NSAIDs in a CB1 receptor-dependent fashion. Dual inhibition of FAAH and cyclooxygenase induced protection against both NSAID-induced gastrointestinal damage and intestinal inflammation. Moreover, in intestinal inflammation direct or indirect activation of CB1 and CB2 receptors exerts also multiple beneficial effects. Namely, activation of both CB receptors was shown to ameliorate intestinal inflammation in various murine colitis models, to decrease visceral hypersensitivity and abdominal pain, as well as to reduce colitis-associated hypermotility and diarrhea. In addition, CB1 receptors suppress secretory processes and also modulate intestinal epithelial barrier functions. Thus, experimental data suggest that the endocannabinoid system represents a promising target in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases, and this assumption is also confirmed by preliminary clinical studies

Gut inflammation: current update on pathophysiology, molecular mechanism and pharmacological treatment modalities

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory condition of the gastrointestinal tract. The two main forms of IBD are Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. According to the recent concept the disease is caused by a combination of factors, including genetics, immune dysregulation, barrier dysfunction and the change in microbial flora. Environmental factors, such as changes in diet, antibiotic use, smoking or improved domestic hygiene (e.g. eradication of intestinal helminths) probably contribute to the development and increased prevalence of IBD. Dysregulation of mucosal immunity in IBD causes an overproduction of inflammatory cytokines which resulted in uncontrolled intestinal inflammation. Based on extensive research over the last decade, besides the conventional therapy, there are several novel pathways and specific targets, on which focus new therapeutics. New therapeutics aim 1./ to correct genetic susceptibility by stimulating NOD2 expression, TLR3 signaling or inhibition of TLR4 pathway, 2./ to restore the immune dysregulation by inhibition of pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6, IL-13, IL-17, IL-18, IL-21), Th1 polarisation (IL-2, IL-12, IL-23, IFN-γ ), T-cell activation, leukocyte adhesion, as well as by immunostimulation (GM-CSF, G-CSF) and anti-inflammatory cytokines (IL-10, IL-11, IFN-β-1a), 3./ to restore mucosal barrier function and stimulate mucosal healing by different growth factors, such as GH, EGF, KGF, TGF-β, VEGF, 4./ to restore the normal bacterial flora by antibiotics, probiotics. However, in spite of these numerous potential targets, the true value and clinical significance of most of the new biologics and molecules are not clear yet