Histamine reduces flash sensitivity of on ganglion cells in the primate retina.

PURPOSE. In Old World primates, the retina receives input from histaminergic neurons in the posterior hypothalamus. They are a subset of the neurons that project throughout the central nervous system and fire maximally during the day. The contribution of these neurons to vision, was examined by applying histamine to a dark-adapted, superfused baboon eye cup preparation while making extracellular recordings from peripheral retinal ganglion cells. METHODS. The stimuli were 5-ms, 560-nm, weak, full-field flashes in the low scotopic range. Ganglion cells with sustained and transient ON responses and two cell types with OFF responses were distinguished; their responses were recorded with a 16-channel microelectrode array. RESULTS. Low micromolar doses of histamine decreased the rate of maintained firing and the light sensitivity of ON ganglion cells. Both sustained and transient ON cells responded similarly to histamine. There were no statistically significant effects of histamine in a more limited study of OFF ganglion cells. The response latencies of ON cells were approximately 5 ms slower, on average, when histamine was present. Histamine also reduced the signal-to-noise ratio of ON cells, particularly in those cells with a histamine-induced increase in maintained activity. CONCLUSIONS. A major action of histamine released from retinopetal axons under dark-adapted conditions, when rod signals dominate the response, is to reduce the sensitivity of ON ganglion cells to light flashes. These findings may relate to reports that humans are less sensitive to light stimuli in the scotopic range during the day, when histamine release in the retina is expected to be at its maximum.

Is paromomycin an effective and safe treatment against cutaneous leishmaniasis? A meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: High cost, poor compliance, and systemic toxicity have limited the use of pentavalent antimony compounds (SbV), the treatment of choice for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). Paromomycin (PR) has been developed as an alternative to SbV, but existing data are conflicting. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, without language restriction, through August 2007, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy or safety between PR and placebo or SbV. Primary outcome was clinical cure, defined as complete healing, disappearance, or reepithelialization of all lesions. Data were extracted independently by two investigators, and pooled using a random-effects model. Fourteen trials including 1,221 patients were included. In placebo-controlled trials, topical PR appeared to have therapeutic activity against the old world and new world CL, with increased local reactions, when used with methylbenzethonium chloride (MBCL) compared to when used alone (risk ratio [RR] for clinical cure, 2.58 versus 1.01: RR for local reactions, 1.60 versus 1.07). In SbV-controlled trials, the efficacy of topical PR was not significantly different from that of intralesional SbV in the old world CL (RR, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.89), whereas topical PR was inferior to parenteral SbV in treating the new world CL (0.67; 0.54-0.82). No significant difference in efficacy was found between parenteral PR and parenteral SbV in the new world CL (0.88; 0.56-1.38). Systemic side effects were fewer with topical or parenteral PR than parenteral SbV. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Topical PR with MBCL could be a therapeutic alternative to SbV in selected cases of the old world CL. Development of new formulations with better efficacy and tolerability remains to be an area of future research.