Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1987 Sep 28;41(13):1591-8.
doi: 10.1016/0024-3205(87)90726-0.

Antigastrolesive, gastric antisecretory, diarrheagenic and mucus-stimulating effects in rats following topically applied rioprostil, a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analog

Comparative Study

Antigastrolesive, gastric antisecretory, diarrheagenic and mucus-stimulating effects in rats following topically applied rioprostil, a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analog

L B Katz et al. Life Sci. .

Abstract

Prostaglandins may have many biological actions including hypotensive and antipeptic ulcer activity. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if the primary alcohol prostaglandin E1 analog rioprostil1 prevents ethanol-induced gastric lesions (antigastrolesive activity), inhibits gastric acid secretion (antisecretory activity), or causes diarrhea in rats when administered topically, and to compare these responses to the effect of rioprostil following enteral (oral or intraduodenal) administration. Rioprostil exhibited antigastrolesive activity in rats when administered either orally or when applied topically. The topical antigastrolesive potency of rioprostil against ethanol-induced lesions [ED50 = 3.7 (0.5-12) micrograms/kg] was similar to its oral potency [ED50 = 1.9 (1.7-2.2) micrograms/kg]. In 4 hr pylorus-ligated rats, topically administered rioprostil inhibited total gastric acid output with a potency [ED50 = 5.1 (2.6-24) mg/kg] similar to intraduodenal administration [ED50 = 3.7 (2.8-5.3) mg/kg]. In addition, in these rats rioprostil increased mucin levels and did not cause dermal irritation. Finally, the incidence of diarrhea was lower when rioprostil was applied topically than when given orally with a 16-fold difference in potency between these two routes of administration. These data show that when rioprostil is applied via the skin it has antigastrolesive, gastric antisecretory and mucus stimulatory effects in rats equal to enteral administration, and a diarrheagenic potency lower than following oral administration. This profile suggests that topical administration of rioprostil may be a useful means of delivery for clinical treatment of peptic ulcer disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources