Morphine does no promote esophageal carcinogenesis in rats exposed to diethylnitrosamine.

BACKGROUND: The high incidence of esophageal cancer in the north of Iran has been associated to the consumption of opium and exposure to nitrosamines. Diethylnitrosamine has an established potential of producing experimental cancer in the esophagus and liver. AIM: To evaluate by histopathology the effect of oral administration of morphine and diethylnitrosamine during 23 weeks on the hepatic and esophageal carcinogenesis on 176 rats. METHODS: We divided the rats into the following groups: Morph: morphine; Den: diethylnitrosamine; Den+morph: Den and morphine in the same solution; Den/morph: Den and morphine in different solutions and days. RESULTS: Morphine did not promote neoplasias. The highest neoplastic incidents were found: a) in the esophagus, Den in relation to Den/morph and Den+morph (71.1%, 55.8%, and 50.0%); b) in the liver, Den and Den/morph in relation to Den+morph (73.8%, 81.4%, and 40.9%); c) higher incident of hepatic neoplasia than esophageal in Den/morph (81.4% and 55.8%). Different doses of diethylnitrosamine were ingested among the groups Den, Den/morph, and Den+morph, respectively 2.9, 2.8, and 2.3 mg/kg/day. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the morphine did not promote esophageal carcinogenesis and may have stimulated the hepatic metabolism of the first pass of the carcinogen.

Morphine does no promote esophageal carcinogenesis in rats exposed to diethylnitrosamine

BACKGROUND: The high incidence of esophageal cancer in the north of Iran has been associated to the consumption of opium and exposure to nitrosamines. Diethylnitrosamine has an established potential of producing experimental cancer in the esophagus and liver. AIM: To evaluate by histopathology the effect of oral administration of morphine and diethylnitrosamine during 23 weeks on the hepatic and esophageal carcinogenesis on 176 rats. METHODS: We divided the rats into the following groups: Morph: morphine; Den: diethylnitrosamine; Den+morph: Den and morphine in the same solution; Den/morph: Den and morphine in different solutions and days. RESULTS: Morphine did not promote neoplasias. The highest neoplastic incidents were found: a) in the esophagus, Den in relation to Den/morph and Den+morph (71.1 percent, 55.8 percent, and 50.0 percent); b) in the liver, Den and Den/morph in relation to Den+morph (73.8 percent, 81.4 percent, and 40.9 percent); c) higher incident of hepatic neoplasia than esophageal in Den/morph (81.4 percent and 55.8 percent). Different doses of diethylnitrosamine were ingested among the groups Den, Den/morph, and Den+morph, respectively 2.9, 2.8, and 2.3 mg/kg/day. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the morphine did not promote esophageal carcinogenesis and may have stimulated the hepatic metabolism of the first pass of the carcinogen.

RACIONAL: A alta incidência de câncer esofagiano no norte do Irã foi associada ao consumo de ópio e exposição às nitrosaminas. A dietilnitrosamina possui potencial estabelecido de produzir câncer experimental em esôfago e fígado. OBJETIVO: Avaliar por histopatologia o efeito da administração oral de morfina e de dietilnitrosamina na carcinogênese esofágica e hepática em ratos. MÉTODOS: Durante 23 semanas, 176 ratos ingeriram diferentes soluções, sendo divididos em grupos: Morf: morfina; Den: dietilnitrosamina; Den+morf: dietilnitrosamina e morfina numa mesma solução; Den/morf: dietilnitrosamina e morfina em diferentes soluções e dias. RESULTADOS: Morf não promoveu neoplasias. Encontraram-se maiores incidências neoplásicas: a) no esôfago, Den em relação à Den/morf e Den+morf (71,1 por cento, 55,8 por cento e 50,0 por cento); b) no fígado, Den e Den/morf em relação à Den+morf (73,8 por cento, 81,4 por cento e 40,9 por cento); c) maior incidência de neoplasia hepática do que esofágica em Den/morf (81,4 por cento e 55,8 por cento). Diferentes doses de dietilnitrosamina foram ingeridas entre os grupos Den, Den/morf e Den+morf, respectivamente 2,9, 2,8 e 2,3 mg/kg/dia. CONCLUSÕES: A morfina não promoveu a carcinogênese esofágica e pode ter estimulado o metabolismo hepático de primeira passagem do carcinógeno.

Teste de Valsalva ortostático no refluxo venoso / Upright Valsalva's test in venous reflux

OBJETIVO: Determinar se a modificação proposta pelos autores no teste de Valsalva proporcionou ganho de sensibilidade, especificidade e acurácia no diagnóstico do refluxo em relação ao teste realizado na posição supina, quando comparados com a flebografia, utilizada como padrão-ouro. MÉTODO: Cento e sessenta e um pacientes com insuficiência venosa crônica (C4, 5 ou 6E P A SDP P R ) foram examinados prospectivamente. Os pacientes foram submetidos à avaliação hemodinâmica, incluindo o teste de Valsalva supino padrão e o novo teste de Valsalva ortostático. A flebografia descendente foi utilizada como padrão-ouro, com a qual os testes foram comparados. Foi criada uma curva ROC (Receiver Operator Characteristic) para determinação do limite superior da normalidade do novo teste. Os valores obtidos para sensibilidade, especificidade e acurácia de cada um dos testes foram comparados entre si, utilizando o teste de comparação de porcentagens de Dunn. Foi adotado o nível de significância de 5 por cento. RESULTADOS: O teste de Valsalva supino padrão atingiu uma sensibilidade de 65 por cento, especificidade de 81 por cento e acurácia de 66 por cento, enquanto o teste de Valsalva ortostático atingiu uma sensibilidade de 80 por cento (P < 0,01), especificidade de 63 por cento (P = 0,43) e acurácia de 78 por cento (P < 0,05). CONCLUSÃO: A modificação no teste de Valsalva proposta pelos autores determinou melhor sensibilidade e acurácia, sem decréscimo significante na especificidade, provando ser útil na avaliação do refluxo da insuficiência venosa crônica.

OBJECTIVE: To test sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the modified upright Valsalva's test described by the authors for diagnosing the reflux, when compared to phlebography, which is used as gold standard. METHOD: One hundred sixty one patients with chronic venous insufficiency (C4, 5 or 6E P A SDP P R) were prospectively examined. The patients were submitted to hemodynamic evaluation, including the standard supine Valsalva's test and the new modified upright Valsalva's test. Descending phlebography was used as a gold standard, to which the hemodynamic tests were compared. A ROC curve (Receiver Operator Characteristic) was plotted to determine the upper limit of normality for the new test. The observed sensitivity, specificity and accuracy values of each test were compared using Dunn's test. The significance level of 5 percent was adopted. RESULTS: The standard supine Valsalva's test reached a sensitivity of 65 percent, specificity of 81 percent and accuracy of 66 percent, whereas the upright Valsalva's test reached a sensitivity of 80 percent (P < 0.01), specificity of 63 percent (P = 0.43) and accuracy of 78 percent (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The modification in the Valsalva's test proposed by the authors seems to determine better sensitivity and accuracy without significant decrease in specificity, proving to be useful in reflux evaluation of chronic venous insufficiency.