Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Sections
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • FAQs
    • For Subscribers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Submit
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Sections
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • FAQs
    • For Subscribers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Submit
  • Visit jpet on Facebook
  • Follow jpet on Twitter
  • Follow jpet on LinkedIn
Abstract

Speed of action of various muscle relaxants at the neuromuscular junction binding vs. buffering hypothesis.

M I Glavinovic, J C Law Min, L Kapural, F Donati and D R Bevan
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics June 1993, 265 (3) 1181-1186;
M I Glavinovic
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J C Law Min
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L Kapural
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
F Donati
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D R Bevan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The speed of action of several nondepolarizing muscle relaxants (gallamine, rocuronium, D-tubocurarine, atracurium, vecuronium, pancuronium and doxacurium) was tested iontophoretically at the frog cutaneous pectoris neuromuscular junction at various temperatures. If differences in rate of onset and offset are due to different molecular rates of binding (and unbinding), and of resulting conformational changes, they should be strongly temperature dependent. In contrast, if differences are due to differences in buffered diffusion, temperature dependence should be low to moderate. The onset and recovery time constants of inhibition of brief acetylcholine pulses, caused by long pulses of relaxants for all of the muscle relaxants, were inversely related to apparent dissociation constants (KD values), that ranged from 4.56 microM (gallamine) to 0.11 microM (doxacurium). The kinetics showed only modest temperature dependence (Q10 values of 1/time constant of offset were typically < 1.4). Because KD values of all muscle relaxants were even less temperature dependent (Q10 < 1.3), this suggests that the kinetics of inhibition is probably determined by the extent of buffering in the synaptic cleft, and not by binding and unbinding. Diffusion of relaxants from the synaptic cleft is expected to be strongly buffered, because the nerve terminal presents a physical barrier to diffusion, and because of extremely high density of acetylcholine receptors. The density of acetylcholine receptors can be calculated from the time constant of offset and KD values of various relaxants, assuming that buffer diffusion is determining the kinetics of action of muscle relaxants.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

JPET articles become freely available 12 months after publication, and remain freely available for 5 years. 

Non-open access articles that fall outside this five year window are available only to institutional subscribers and current ASPET members, or through the article purchase feature at the bottom of the page. 

 

  • Click here for information on institutional subscriptions.
  • Click here for information on individual ASPET membership.

 

Log in using your username and password

Forgot your user name or password?

Purchase access

You may purchase access to this article. This will require you to create an account if you don't already have one.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Vol. 265, Issue 3
1 Jun 1993
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Speed of action of various muscle relaxants at the neuromuscular junction binding vs. buffering hypothesis.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Abstract

Speed of action of various muscle relaxants at the neuromuscular junction binding vs. buffering hypothesis.

M I Glavinovic, J C Law Min, L Kapural, F Donati and D R Bevan
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics June 1, 1993, 265 (3) 1181-1186;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Abstract

Speed of action of various muscle relaxants at the neuromuscular junction binding vs. buffering hypothesis.

M I Glavinovic, J C Law Min, L Kapural, F Donati and D R Bevan
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics June 1, 1993, 265 (3) 1181-1186;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Similar Articles

Advertisement
  • Home
  • Alerts
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   RSS

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Fast Forward by date
  • Fast Forward by section
  • Latest Articles
  • Archive
  • Search for Articles
  • Feedback
  • ASPET

More Information

  • About JPET
  • Editorial Board
  • Instructions to Authors
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Customized Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • Subscriptions
  • Permissions
  • Terms & Conditions of Use

ASPET's Other Journals

  • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
  • Molecular Pharmacology
  • Pharmacological Reviews
  • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
ISSN 1521-0103 (Online)

Copyright © 2022 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics