Talk:Local anesthetic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following copied from Kosebamse talk page:
Hi, Kosebamse. Thanks for complimenting my contribution to local anesthetic. Unfortunately, I don't really know much about the topic besides what I touched on--that the targets are voltage-gated sodium channels. I could expand on the molecular details perhaps, but I suspect it's detail that most people wouldn't want to know. Do you disagree? 168... 01:09 Feb 14, 2003 (UTC)
- Well, yes, to some degree. I'll be happy to do some more on the pharmacology and clinical uses, but my knowledge about the molecular mechanisms is rather patchy. So if you like you might contribute some details, perhaps one or two more paragraphs? And by the way, I'll move this to the article's talk page where people may look for it. Thanks for your help! Kosebamse
When I searched lidocaine binding on the Web I saw conflicting theories about how it affects Na+ channels, although I saw some agreement in as far as the view that there is a gating effect and not/not only pore occlusion. That's just lidocaine, though. 168... 18:53 Feb 15, 2003 (UTC)
- There are several theories with respect to open/closed/inactive channels and even the lipid bilayer of the cell membrane is thought to be a target. However, there seems to be some agreement that the main action is occlusion of the Na+ channel somewhere near the pore at the cytoplasmic side. I believe that everything we discuss here is class effects and it doesn't matter much whether it's been studied on lidocaine or whatever. But I'm afraid I am leaving firm ground here and would be grateful for any enlightening comments. Kosebamse 23:55 Feb 15, 2003 (UTC)
We need a History section -- this page has some good information Local Anesthetics --Thoric 00:18, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Clean up Required
[edit] This copied from an erroneous VfD
[edit] Regional anaesthesia
This article appears to me to be a less comprehensive article, and a duplication of the subject of Local anaesthesia L-Bit 3 July 2005 00:06 (UTC)
- While I don't know the subject, the thing to do if that is indeed the case would be a redirect from one to the other. No VfD required. CDC (talk) 3 July 2005 00:42 (UTC)
Keep, expand. Different from Local anaesthesia, and if that is a valid topic then this should be also, with cross-reference links both ways. It is important for the article to show that it is not the same as local. --WCFrancis 4 July 2005 08:56 (UTC)
- But, keep in mind I am not in the medical profession or by any means knowledgeable about anaesthesia.
Make my vote Weak Keep for now.--WCFrancis 4 July 2005 09:00 (UTC)- Back to Keep, with restructuring. Looking for definitions makes me think that local anaesthesia is a subset of regional anaesthesia. Therefore, I suggest that the material in Local anaesthesia be moved to Regional anaesthesia and a redirect created from the local anaesthesia article. But, first, we must ask the age-old question - Is there a Doctor in the house?. --WCFrancis 4 July 2005 09:35 (UTC)
Keep Had I done some research before posting here, I would probably not have posted as VfD. Acccording to Oysten's website, local anaesthesia is indeed a subset of regional anaesthesia and so User:WCFrancis; you are correct. However, as Dr Oysten states, ".... many people use the phrase (local anaesthesia) loosely to include regional anaesthesia". That begs the question, if "Local" is more commonly used to refer to the medically correct term "Regional", and I would hazard a guess that "more commonly" should be read as "almost universally", then should "Local" be the main entry? I note also that the original "Regional" article spells anaethesia without the second 'A'. I have no idea if this is American spelling or a typo. So, I am giving up with this VfD and copying this whole section to the two discussion pages - "Regional" and "Local" in the hope that a medical person and/or a person better versed in Wiki procedures can clean up the issue. L-Bit 01:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
