Abstract
The use of botulinum neurotoxin-A (BoNT-A) is an alternative for the management of orofacial pain disorders. Although only Botox has labeled, there are other commercial brands available for use, among them: Dysport, Botulift, Prosigne, and Xeomin. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the possible differences in the antinociceptive effect evoked by different commercially available formulations of BoNT-A in an animal model of inflammatory orofacial pain induced by formalin injection. Male C57/BL6 mice (20–25 g) were submitted to the pre-treatment with five different commercial brands of BoNT-A (Botox, Botulift, Xeomin, Dysport, or Prosigne; with doses between 0.02 and 0.2 Units of Botulinum Toxin, in 20 μL of 0.9% saline) three days prior the 2% formalin injection. All injections were made subcutaneously into the right perinasal area. After formalin injections, nociceptive behaviors like rubbing the place of injection were quantified during the neurogenic (0–5 min) and inflammatory (15–30 min) phases. The treatment using Botox, Botulift, and Xeomin were able to induce antinociceptive effects in both phases of the formalin-induced pain animal model, however, Dysport and Prosigne reduced the response in neither of them. Our data suggest that the treatment using different formulations of BoNT-A is not similar in efficacy as analgesics when evaluated in formalin-induced orofacial pain in mice.
Highlights
Pain is a common experience that has profound societal effects, with a greater prevalence in women that increases with age (Johannes et al, 2010)
We verified if Botox® was able to prevent nociception in the orofacial pain animal model induced by formalin, which is regarded as being pertinent to clinical pain (Raboisson e Dallel, 2004), and which dose had the best therapeutic response
We observed that orofacial subcutaneous treatment using Botox® 0.02 U and 0.06 U reduced the face rubbing behavior by 42.9% and 34.5%, respectively; when analyzing the first phase of the formalininduced orofacial pain (Fig. 1A)
Summary
Pain is a common experience that has profound societal effects, with a greater prevalence in women that increases with age (Johannes et al, 2010). Orofacial pain (OFP) is extremely debilitating and refers to pain associated with the hard and soft tissues of the head, face, and neck (Groenewegen e Uylings, 2000), affecting about 26% of the population (Macfarlane et al, 2002). Anamnesis should be detailed, individualized, and comprehensive. Ruling out the possibility of toothache, management of OFP consists of stabilizing plaque, pharma cotherapy, physiotherapy, in addition to thermotherapy, laser, needling, or anesthetic trigger point infiltration are recommended and efficient (Groenewegen e Uylings, 2000). Some individuals are resis tant and/or refractory to conventional approaches, motivating research in search of new therapeutic options, including the use of botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) (Chaurand et al, 2017; Schwartz e Freund, 2002; Scott et al, 2009; Sim, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
