Neurophysiological evaluation of convergent afferents innervating the human esophagus and area of referred pain on the anterior chest wall

Noxious stimuli in the esophagus cause pain that is referred to the anterior chest wall because of convergence of visceral and somatic afferents within the spinal cord. We sought to characterize the neurophysiological responses of these convergent spinal pain pathways in humans by studying 12 healthy subjects over three visits (V1, V2, and V3). Esophageal pain thresholds (Eso-PT) were assessed by electrical stimulation and anterior chest wall pain thresholds (ACW-PT) by use of a contact heat thermode. Esophageal evoked potentials (EEP) were recorded from the vertex following 200 electrical stimuli, and anterior chest wall evoked potentials (ACWEP) were recorded following 40 heat pulses. The fear of pain questionnaire (FPQ) was administered on V1. Statistical data are shown as point estimates of difference +/- 95% confidence interval. Pain thresholds increased between V1 and V3 [Eso-PT: V1-V3 = -17.9 mA (-27.9, -7.9) P < 0.001; ACW-PT: V1-V3 = -3.38 degrees C (-5.33, -1.42) P = 0.001]. The morphology of cortical responses from both sites was consistent and equivalent [P1, N1, P2, N2 complex, where P1 and P2 are is the first and second positive (downward) components of the CEP waveform, respectively, and N1 and N2 are the first and second negative (upward) components, respectively], indicating activation of similar cortical networks. For EEP, N1 and P2 latencies decreased between V1 and V3 [N1: V1-V3 = 13.7 (1.8, 25.4) P = 0.02; P2: V1-V3 = 32.5 (11.7, 53.2) P = 0.003], whereas amplitudes did not differ. For ACWEP, P2 latency increased between V1 and V3 [-35.9 (-60, -11.8) P = 0.005] and amplitudes decreased [P1-N1: V1-V3 = 5.4 (2.4, 8.4) P = 0.01; P2-N2: 6.8 (3.4, 10.3) P < 0.001]. The mean P1 latency of EEP over three visits was 126.6 ms and that of ACWEP was 101.6 ms, reflecting afferent transmission via Adelta fibers. There was a significant negative correlation between FPQ scores and Eso-PT on V1 (r = -0.57, P = 0.05). These data provide the first neurophysiological evidence of convergent esophageal and somatic pain pathways in humans.

Deep brain stimulation for chronic pain investigated with magnetoencephalography

Deep brain stimulation has shown remarkable potential in alleviating otherwise treatment-resistant chronic pain, but little is currently known about the underlying neural mechanisms. Here for the first time, we used noninvasive neuroimaging by magnetoencephalography to map changes in neural activity induced by deep brain stimulation in a patient with severe phantom limb pain. When the stimulator was turned off, the patient reported significant increases in subjective pain. Corresponding significant changes in neural activity were found in a network including the mid-anterior orbitofrontal and subgenual cingulate cortices; these areas are known to be involved in pain relief. Hence, they could potentially serve as future surgical targets to relieve chronic pain. © 2007 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Psychophysiological responses to pain identify reproducible human clusters

Pain is a ubiquitous yet highly variable experience. The psychophysiological and genetic factors responsible for this variability remain unresolved. We hypothesised the existence of distinct human pain clusters (PCs) composed of distinct psychophysiological and genetic profiles coupled with differences in the perception and the brain processing of pain. We studied 120 healthy subjects in whom the baseline personality and anxiety traits and the serotonin transporter-linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) genotype were measured. Real-time autonomic nervous system parameters and serum cortisol were measured at baseline and after standardised visceral and somatic pain stimuli. Brain processing reactions to visceral pain were studied in 29 subjects using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The reproducibility of the psychophysiological responses to pain was assessed at 1 year. In group analysis, visceral and somatic pain caused an expected increase in sympathetic and cortisol responses and activated the pain matrix according to fMRI studies. However, using cluster analysis, we found 2 reproducible PCs: at baseline, PC1 had higher neuroticism/anxiety scores (P ≤ 0.01); greater sympathetic tone (P < 0.05); and higher cortisol levels (P ≤ 0.001). During pain, less stimulus was tolerated (P ≤ 0.01), and there was an increase in parasympathetic tone (P ≤ 0.05). The 5-HTTLPR short allele was over-represented (P ≤ 0.005). PC2 had the converse profile at baseline and during pain. Brain activity differed (P ≤ 0.001); greater activity occurred in the left frontal cortex in PC1, whereas PC2 showed greater activity in the right medial/frontal cortex and right anterior insula. In health, 2 distinct reproducible PCs exist in humans. In the future, PC characterization may help to identify subjects at risk for developing chronic pain and may reduce variability in brain imaging studies. © 2013 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Brain activity modifications following spinal cord stimulation for chronic neuropathic pain:a systematic review

Background and objective: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is believed to exert supraspinal effects; however, these mechanisms are still far from fully elucidated. This systematic review aims to assess existing neurophysiological and functional neuroimaging literature to reveal current knowledge regarding the effects of SCS for chronic neuropathic pain on brain activity, to identify gaps in knowledge, and to suggest directions for future research. Databases and data treatment: Electronic databases and hand-search of reference lists were employed to identify publications investigating brain activity associated with SCS in patients with chronic neuropathic pain, using neurophysiological and functional neuroimaging techniques (fMRI, PET, MEG, EEG). Studies investigating patients with SCS for chronic neuropathic pain and studying brain activity related to SCS were included. Demographic data (age, gender), study factors (imaging modality, patient diagnoses, pain area, duration of SCS at recording, stimulus used) and brain areas activated were extracted from the included studies. Results: Twenty-four studies were included. Thirteen studies used neuroelectrical imaging techniques, eight studies used haemodynamic imaging techniques, two studies employed both neuroelectrical and haemodynamic techniques separately, and one study investigated cerebral neurobiology. Conclusions: The limited available evidence regarding supraspinal mechanisms of SCS does not allow us to develop any conclusive theories. However, the studies included appear to show an inhibitory effect of SCS on somatosensory evoked potentials, as well as identifying the thalamus and anterior cingulate cortex as potential mediators of the pain experience. The lack of substantial evidence in this area highlights the need for large-scale controlled studies of this kind.