RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Patients suffering from fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) are heterogenous. They often present with sensory abnormalities and comorbidities. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a specific somatosensory profile in our patient cohort? (2) Can we detect subgroups characterized by a specific combination of sensory and psychological features? and (3) Do psychological parameters influence sensory signs? METHODS: In 87 patients with FMS quantitative sensory testing was performed on the hand and evaluated in combination with questionnaire results regarding pain, psychological comorbidities, sleep, and functionality. RESULTS: Patients presented different somatosensory patterns, but no specific subgroups regarding sensory signs and psychological features were detected. Hypersensitivity for noxious mechanical and thermal stimuli and hyposensitivity for nonnoxious mechanical stimuli were the most prominent features. Thirty-one percent of patients showed signs of central sensitization as indicated by abnormally increased pinprick hyperalgesia or dynamic mechanical allodynia. Central sensitization was associated with higher pain intensities (P < 0.001). Only a small influence of psychiatric comorbidities on mechanical pain sensitivity (P = 0.044) and vibration detection (P = 0.028) was found, which was partly associated with high pain intensities. A small subgroup of patients (11.4%) demonstrated thermal hyposensitivity (loss of small-fiber function). CONCLUSION: Patients with FMS showed various somatosensory abnormalities. These were not significantly influenced by psychological comorbidities. Signs for central sensitization were detected in about one-third of patients and associated with higher pain intensities. This supports the notion of central sensitization being a major pathophysiological mechanism in FMS, whereas small-fiber loss may be less important.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: In postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) different types of patients can be distinguished regarding their predominant peripheral nociceptor function. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to examine somatosensory profiles in the course of disease with special regard to the different subtypes existing in PHN. METHODS: Twenty patients with PHN (7 men and 13 women, age 67 ± 9.6 years) were examined at baseline (disease duration 18.1 ± 26 months) and follow-up (31.6 ± 23.8 months later) with quantitative sensory testing (protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain). RESULTS: Fourteen (70%) PHN patients presented with impaired (iPHN) and 6 (30%) with preserved (pPHN) C-fiber function. Groups did not differ regarding age, disease duration, or pain intensity at baseline. Both groups did not differ regarding change in pain intensity (-0.5 ± 2.3 vs -1.7 ± 2.6 numerical rating scale, P = n.s.) at follow-up. Impaired PHN improved in thermal and mechanical detection thresholds as well as allodynia independent from change in pain intensity. By contrast, pPHN showed an increase in mechanical pain sensitivity (1.4 ± 2.5 vs -0.4 ± 2.2, P < 0.05) and a trend towards a stronger loss of detection (66% vs 33%, P = n.s.) on follow-up. CONCLUSION: Results demonstrate that patients with preserved C-fiber function are more predisposed to develop signs of central sensitization as demonstrated by an increased mechanical pain sensitivity. Impaired C-fiber function is able to improve even in chronic cases, but a functional loss is unlikely to play a role here. The knowledge of development of somatosensory profiles in the course of the disease offers possibilities to optimize a mechanism-based treatment.