Table 1.
Effect of rimonabant and capsazepine on spectral power distribution evaluated 7 days after ischemia, in gerbils
| Drug dose (mg kg−1) | δ (0.2–4.0 Hz) | ϑ (4.2–8.0 Hz) | α (8.2–13 Hz) | β (13.2–25Hz) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sham | 45.00±3.00 | 44.00±2.00 | 10.00±0.40 | 1.00±0.30 |
| Vehiclea | 62.00±2.00** | 32.00±2.20** | 5.00±1.70** | 1.50±0.50 |
| Rimonabant (0.05)b | 40.79±4.64$$ | 50.50±2.93$$$ | 8.50±1.50 | 0.75±0.05 |
| Rimonabant (0.125)b | 39.15±2.14$$ | 46.86±1.57$ | 12.35±1.47$$ | 1.80±0.37 |
| Rimonabant (0.25)b | 37.60±1.15$$$ | 49.60±1.15$$ | 11.20±1.15$$$ | 2.20±1.17 |
| Rimonabant (0.5)b | 38.33±2.18$$ | 45.33±1.20$ | 13.33±0.88$$ | 2.66±1.20 |
| Rimonabant (1) | 41.67±3.18$$ | 49.00±1.73$$$ | 8.67±1.20 | 1.00±0.50 |
| Rimonabant (3) | 71.67±3.69** | 26.67±3.66** | 0.83±0.17***,$ | 0.50±0.01 |
| Capsazepine (0.01) | 63.00±1.00** | 31.00±2.50** | 5.00±1.50** | 1.00±0.50 |
| Capsazepine (0.01)c+Rimonabant (0.05) | 36.00±1.0$$$ | 48.00±1.0$$ | 15.50±0.3**,$$ | 0.50±0.20 |
| Capsazepine (0.01)c+Rimonabant (0.125) | 37.50±2.50$$ | 52.50±1.5$$$ | 9.50±3.50 | 0.75±0.25# |
| Capsazepine (0.01)c+Rimonabant (0.25) | 47.00±9.50 | 44.00±5.6 | 9.00±3.80 | 0.70±0.20### |
| Capsazepine (0.01)c+Rimonabant (0.5) | 37.50±2.5$$ | 50.50±3.5$$$ | 11.50±0.50$$ | 0.75±0.25### |
a
Vehicle was given 15 min before carotid occlusion or 5 min after recirculation.
b
Rimonabant was administered i.p. 5 min after recirculation.
c
Capsazepine was injected s.c. 15 min before carotid occlusion. Each value represents mean (±s.e.m.) of five animals.
**
P<0.01 compared with sham-operated group;
$
P<0.05,
$$
P<0.01,
$$$
P<0.001 compared with the vehicle group and CPZ alone;
#
P<0.05,
##P<0.01,
###
P<0.001 compared with rimonabant, alone (ANOVA followed by Tukey's test).