palmitoylethanolamide.com.au
HomeResearchDaniela 2014

Micronized/ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide displays superior oral efficacy compared to nonmicronized palmitoylethanolamide in a rat model of inflammatory pain

Daniela Impellizzeri, Giuseppe Bruschetta, Marika Cordaro, Rosalia Crupi, Rosalba Siracusa, Emanuela Esposito, Salvatore Cuzzocrea. J Neuroinflammation. 2014;11:136.

Laboratory studyOther animals

Design
Laboratory study
Subjects
Rats given an intraplantar carrageenan injection to produce paw inflammation
Dose used in the study
micronised PEA (PEA-m, 10 mg/kg) or ultramicronised PEA (PEA-um, 10 mg/kg) or nonmicronised PEA (PeaPure, 10 mg/kg), given by mouth or into the abdomen
Duration
Acute carrageenan model; exact duration not stated beyond the standard time course
What was measured
Inflammatory cell infiltration, myeloperoxidase activity, paw swelling and thermal hyperalgesia, comparing oral and intraperitoneal dosing across the three PEA formulations.

What the authors reported

Oral micronised and ultramicronised PEA reduced inflammatory cell infiltration, myeloperoxidase activity, paw swelling and thermal hyperalgesia, but oral nonmicronised PEA (PeaPure) did not. When given into the abdomen instead, all three formulations were effective.

Limits of this study

A rat model of carrageenan-induced paw inflammation; it cannot show effect in people. This paper's original 2014 version was later followed by a formal erratum (PMID 27245980). Funding and conflicts not stated in the abstract.

Source

PubMed 25164769 · doi:10.1186/s12974-014-0136-0

Entry checked against the abstract on PubMed on 2026-09-22. The dose shown is the dose the researchers used. It is not a recommendation. How to read this page.