Indication for spinal sensitization in chronic low back pain: mechanical hyperalgesia adjacent to but not within the most painful body area.

Introduction: In 85% of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), no specific pathoanatomical cause can be identified. Besides primary peripheral drivers within the lower back, spinal or supraspinal sensitization processes might contribute to the patients' pain. Objectives: The present study conceptualized the most painful area (MP) of patients with nonspecific CLBP as primarily affected area and assessed signs of peripheral, spinal, and supraspinal sensitization using quantitative sensory testing (QST) in MP, a pain-free area adjacent to MP (AD), and a remote, pain-free control area (CON). Methods: Fifty-nine patients with CLBP (51 years, SD = 16.6, 22 female patients) and 35 pain-free control participants individually matched for age, sex, and testing areas (49 years, SD = 17.5, 19 female participants) underwent a full QST protocol in MP and a reduced QST protocol assessing sensory gain in AD and CON. Quantitative sensory testing measures, except paradoxical heat sensations and dynamic mechanical allodynia (DMA), were Z-transformed to the matched control participants and tested for significance using Z-tests (α = 0.001). Paradoxical heat sensations and DMA occurrence were compared between cohorts using Fisher's exact tests (α = 0.05). The same analyses were performed with a high-pain and a low-pain CLBP subsample (50% quantile). Results: Patients showed cold and vibration hypoesthesia in MP (all Ps < 0.001) and mechanical hyperalgesia (P < 0.001) and more frequent DMA (P = 0.044) in AD. The results were mainly driven by the high-pain CLBP subsample. In CON, no sensory alterations were observed. Conclusion: Mechanical hyperalgesia and DMA adjacent to but not within MP, the supposedly primarily affected area, might reflect secondary hyperalgesia originating from spinal sensitization in patients with CLBP.

Sensory phenotypes in complex regional pain syndrome and chronic low back pain-indication of common underlying pathomechanisms.

Introduction: First-line pain treatment is unsatisfactory in more than 50% of chronic pain patients, likely because of the heterogeneity of mechanisms underlying pain chronification. Objectives: This cross-sectional study aimed to better understand pathomechanisms across different chronic pain cohorts, regardless of their diagnoses, by identifying distinct sensory phenotypes through a cluster analysis. Methods: We recruited 81 chronic pain patients and 63 age-matched and sex-matched healthy controls (HC). Two distinct chronic pain cohorts were recruited, ie, complex regional pain syndrome (N = 20) and low back pain (N = 61). Quantitative sensory testing (QST) was performed in the most painful body area to investigate somatosensory changes related to clinical pain. Furthermore, QST was conducted in a pain-free area to identify remote sensory alterations, indicating more widespread changes in somatosensory processing. Results: Two clusters were identified based on the QST measures in the painful area, which did not represent the 2 distinct pain diagnoses but contained patients from both cohorts. Cluster 1 showed increased pain sensitivities in the painful and control area, indicating central sensitization as a potential pathomechanism. Cluster 2 showed a similar sensory profile as HC in both tested areas. Hence, either QST was not sensitive enough and more objective measures are needed to detect sensitization within the nociceptive neuraxis or cluster 2 may not have pain primarily because of sensitization, but other factors such as psychosocial ones are involved. Conclusion: These findings support the notion of shared pathomechanisms irrespective of the pain diagnosis. Conversely, different mechanisms might contribute to the pain of patients with the same diagnosis.

Central sensitization in CRPS patients with widespread pain: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Widespread pain hypersensitivity and enhanced temporal summation of pain (TSP) are commonly reported in patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and discussed as proxies for central sensitization. This study aimed to directly relate such signs of neuronal hyperexcitability to the pain phenotype of CRPS patients. METHODS: Twenty-one CRPS patients and 20 healthy controls (HC) were recruited. The pain phenotype including spatial pain extent (assessed in % body surface) and intensity were assessed and related to widespread pain hypersensitivity, TSP, and psychological factors. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) was performed in the affected, the contralateral and a remote (control) area. RESULTS: CRPS patients showed decreased pressure pain thresholds in all tested areas (affected: t(34) = 4.98, P < .001, contralateral: t(35) = 3.19, P = .005, control: t(31) = 2.65, P = .012). Additionally, patients showed increased TSP in the affected area (F(3,111) = 4.57, P = .009) compared to HC. TSP was even more enhanced in patients with a high compared to a low spatial pain extent (F(3,51) = 5.67, P = .008), suggesting pronounced spinal sensitization in patients with extended pain patterns. Furthermore, the spatial pain extent positively correlated with the Bath Body Perception Disturbance Scale (ρ = 0.491; P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we provide evidence that the pain phenotype in CRPS, that is, spatial pain extent, might be related to sensitization mechanism within the central nociceptive system. This study points towards central neuronal excitability as a potential therapeutic target in patients with more widespread CRPS.

Anti- and Pro-Nociceptive mechanisms in neuropathic pain after human spinal cord injury.

BACKGROUND: Deficient endogenous pain modulation and increased nociceptive excitability are key features of central sensitization and can be assessed in humans by conditioned pain modulation (CPM, anti-nociceptive) and temporal summation of pain (TSP, pro-nociceptive), respectively. This study aimed to investigate these measures as proxies for central sensitization in subjects with chronic neuropathic pain (NP) after spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: In paraplegic subjects with NP (SCI-NP; n = 17) and healthy controls (HC; n = 17), parallel and sequential sham-controlled CPM paradigms were performed using pressure pain threshold at the hand, that is, above lesion level, as test stimulus. The conditioning stimulus was a noxious cold (verum) or lukewarm water bath (sham) applied contralaterally. Regarding pro-nociceptive mechanisms, a TSP protocol with individually-adjusted pressure pain stimuli at the thenar eminence was used. CPM and TSP magnitudes were related to intensity and spatial extent of spontaneous NP. RESULTS: Neither the parallel nor sequential sham-controlled CPM paradigm showed any significant inhibition of above-level pressure pain thresholds for SCI-NP or HC. Accordingly, no group difference in CPM capacity was found, however, subjects with more intense spontaneous NP showed lower inhibitory CPM capacity. TSP was observed for both groups but was not enhanced in SCI-NP. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support altered above-level anti- or pro-nociceptive mechanisms in SCI-NP compared with HC; however, they also highlight the relevance of spontaneous NP intensity with regards to the capacity of endogenous pain modulation in SCI subjects. SIGNIFICANCE: Central sensitization encompasses deficient endogenous pain modulation and increased nociceptive excitability. These two mechanisms can be assessed in humans by conditioned pain modulation and temporal summation of pain, respectively. Our data demonstrates a lack of descending pain inhibition only in subjects with severe neuropathic pain which may hint towards central sensitization at spinal and/or supra-spinal levels. Disentangling the mechanisms of endogenous pain modulation and neuronal hyperexcitability might improve mechanism-based treatment of neuropathic pain in subjects with spinal cord injury.

Inclusive Trial Designs in Acute Spinal Cord Injuries: Prediction-Based Stratification of Clinical Walking Outcome and Projected Enrolment Frequencies.

BACKGROUND: New therapeutic approaches in neurological disorders are progressing into clinical development. Past failures in translational research have underlined the critical importance of selecting appropriate inclusion criteria and primary outcomes. Narrow inclusion criteria provide sensitivity, but increase trial duration and cost to the point of infeasibility, while broader requirements amplify confounding, increasing the risk of trial failure. This dilemma is perhaps most pronounced in spinal cord injury (SCI), but applies to all neurological disorders with low frequency and/or heterogeneous clinical manifestations. OBJECTIVE: Stratification of homogeneous patient cohorts to enable the design of clinical trials with broad inclusion criteria. METHODS: Prospectively-gathered data from patients with acute cervical SCI were analysed using an unbiased recursive partitioning conditional inference tree (URP-CTREE) approach. Performance in the 6-minute walk test at 6 months after injury was classified based on standardized neurological assessments within the first 15 days of injury. Functional and neurological outcomes were tracked throughout rehabilitation up to 6 months after injury. RESULTS: URP-CTREE identified homogeneous outcome cohorts in a study group of 309 SCI patients. These cohorts were validated by an internal, yet independent, validation group of 172 patients. The study group cohorts identified demonstrated distinct recovery profiles throughout rehabilitation. The baseline characteristics of the analysed groups were compared to a reference group of 477 patients. CONCLUSION: URP-CTREE enables inclusive trial design by revealing the distribution of outcome cohorts, discerning distinct recovery profiles and projecting potential patient enrolment by providing estimates of the relative frequencies of cohorts to improve the design of clinical trials in SCI and beyond.

Endogenous opioids contribute to the feeling of pain relief in humans.

Endogenous opioids mediate the pleasurable responses to positively reinforcing stimuli such as palatable food. Yet, the reduction or omission of a negative experience can also be rewarding (negative reinforcement). As such, pain relief leads to negative reinforcement and evokes a pleasant feeling in humans. Although it has been shown that the feeling of pleasure associated with positive reinforcement is at least partly mediated through endogenous opioids, it is currently unknown whether similar neurochemical mechanisms are involved in the pleasant feeling evoked by pain relief. In this study, 27 healthy participants completed 2 identical experimental sessions, 1 with placebo and 1 with naltrexone, an endogenous opioid antagonist. Pain relief was induced by superficial cooling after heat stimulation of capsaicin-sensitized skin. Participants rated the relief and pleasantness in response to the cooling. Endogenous opioid blockade by naltrexone decreased relief and pleasantness ratings compared with placebo (P = 0.0027). This study provides evidence that endogenous opioids play a role in mediating the pleasant feeling of pain relief in humans. Clinically, the rewarding nature of pain relief and its underlying mechanisms require consideration because of their potential reinforcing effects on behaviors that might be beneficial short-term but maladaptive long-term.

The Effect of Conditioned Pain Modulation on Tonic Heat Pain Assessed Using Participant-Controlled Temperature.

OBJECTIVE: Descending pain modulation can be experimentally assessed by way of testing conditioned pain modulation. The application of tonic heat as a test stimulus in such paradigms offers the possibility of observing dynamic pain responses, such as adaptation and temporal summation of pain. Here we investigated conditioned pain modulation effects on tonic heat employing participant-controlled temperature, an alternative tonic heat pain assessment. Changes in pain perception are thereby represented by temperature adjustments performed by the participant, uncoupling this approach from direct pain ratings. Participant-controlled temperature has emerged as a reliable and sex-independent measure of tonic heat. METHODS: Thirty healthy subjects underwent a sequential conditioned pain modulation paradigm, in which a cold water bath was applied as the conditioning stimulus and tonic heat as a test stimulus. Subjects were instructed to change the temperature of the thermode in response to variations in perception to tonic heat in order to maintain their initial rating over a two-minute period. Two additional test stimuli (i.e., lower limb noxious withdrawal reflex and pressure pain threshold) were included as positive controls for conditioned pain modulation effects. RESULTS: Participant-controlled temperature revealed conditioned pain modulation effects on temporal summation of pain (P = 0.01). Increased noxious withdrawal reflex thresholds (P = 0.004) and pressure pain thresholds (P < 0.001) in response to conditioning also confirmed inhibitory conditioned pain modulation effects. CONCLUSIONS: The measured interaction between conditioned pain modulation and temporal summation of pain supports the participant-controlled temperature approach as a promising method to explore dynamic inhibitory and facilitatory pain processes previously undetected by rating-based approaches.

New life for an old idea: Assessing tonic heat pain by means of participant controlled temperature.

BACKGROUND: Temporal changes of pain perception to prolonged tonic heat pain are conventionally assessed using a computerized visual analog scale. Such a rating-based approach is, however, prone to floor and ceiling effects, which limit the assessment of temporal changes in perception. Thus, alternative methods that overcome these shortcomings are warranted. NEW METHOD: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and reliability of a psychophysical approach, i.e., participant-controlled temperature (PCT), to evaluate ongoing human perception of tonic heat pain. Fifty participants were presented with a 45 °C stimulus on the non-dominant hand, and were instructed to maintain their initial sensation for two minutes via a feedback controller in the dominant hand. A subset of participants (n = 17) performed PCT tonic heat protocols on two different days to determine the test-retest reliability. As participants controlled temperature to maintain a stable pain perception, any adjustments made reflected shifts in their perception of heat. RESULTS: In 33 (71.7%) participants, we observed an initial adaptation (participant increased temperature) followed by temporal summation of pain (participant decreased temperature). Twelve participants (26.1%) showed only adaptation and one (2.2%) only temporal summation. No sex differences were observed, nor did the initial rating of pain have an effect on PCT outcomes. Temporal summation of pain showed moderate to substantial reliability upon retest. CONCLUSIONS: PCT represents can be reliably performed using a contact heat stimulator to measure the temporal summation of pain. The standardized setup and overall good reliability of the outcome measures facilitate a sound implementation into the clinical work-up of patients with pain conditions.