{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0214168039538715, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005766062602965404, 'mean_word_length': 5.394736842105263, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effect of malotilate on ethanol-induced gastric mucosal damage in capsaicin-pretreated rats.

We studied the role of afferent sensory neurons in malotilate-mediated gastric mucosal protection. Intact and capsaicin sensory-denervated rats were used in the experiments. Gross gastric mucosal injury was assessed and evaluated as a main criterion of the gastroprotective effect of the tested substances. Besides malotilate, methyl-prostaglandin E2 was applied alone or in combination with malotilate to compare the effects and the mechanism of action of both substances. The results revealed that both malotilate as well as methyl-prostaglandin E2 exerted a significant protective action on 96% ethanol-induced gastric mucosal damage. However, there were no significant differences between intact and capsaicin-denervated rats. Only the use of 50% ethanol as a milder mucosal irritating agent resulted in significant differences in both groups of animals. We propose that malotilate (like methyl-prostaglandin E2) has a gastroprotective effect on ethanol-induced gastric mucosal injury. This effect is partly dependent on the sensory nervous system and the combination of both above substances has an additive effect.