Journal of Applied Physiology Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Appl Physiol 63: 51-57, 1987;
8750-7587/87 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Murciano, D.
Right arrow Articles by Pariente, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Murciano, D.
Right arrow Articles by Pariente, R.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 63, Issue 1 51-57, Copyright © 1987 by American Physiological Society

ARTICLES

Effects of theophylline and enprofylline on diaphragmatic contractility

D. Murciano, M. Aubier, N. Viires, H. Mal and R. Pariente

Experimental data suggest that theophylline (T) enhances diaphragmatic contractility by increasing the influx of calcium at the cell membrane level through an inhibition of adenosine receptors (Aubier et al., J. Appl. Physiol. 54: 460-4, 1983). Enprofylline (E) is a xanthine drug that has poor ability to antagonize physiological actions of adenosine. The aim of this study was to compare the effects on diaphragmatic contractility of T and E in order to determine whether antagonism of adenosine receptors was the underlying mechanism of the inotropic effect of T on diaphragmatic contractility. Ten normal subjects were studied in the sitting position. The contractile properties of the diaphragm were assessed by measuring the transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi) generated at functional residual capacity during bilateral electrical stimulation of the phrenic nerves. The subjects were randomized, and after control measurements were performed, they received T or E. This was a double-blind crossover study, the measurements being repeated with the second drug after one week. Both drugs were administered intravenously with a loading dose of 6 and 2 mg/kg administered in 30 min for T and E and a maintenance dose of 0.9 and 0.075 mg.kg-1 X h-1 for T and E, respectively. Measurements were performed before and 60 min after T or E administration. Plasmatic levels of both drugs were also analyzed. In all the subjects, therapeutic levels of T or E were reached (14.8 +/- 0.6 and 3.9 +/- 0.42 mg/l for T and E, respectively, at 30 min).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
G. T. Ferguson, N. Khanchandani, C. D. Lattin, and H. G. Goshgarian
Clinical Effects of Theophylline on Inspiratory Muscle Drive in Tetraplegia
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, September 1, 1999; 13(3): 191 - 197.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online