Sensory Profiles in Patients with Low Back Pain with and Without Radiculopathy.

OBJECTIVE: During routine clinical evaluation, it can be challenging to differentiate between lumbar radiculopathy (RAD) and lower back pain with non-radicular somatic referred pain (SRP) or even axial non-radiating low back pain (LBP). The aim of this study was to characterize patients with RAD, axial LBP (aLBP), and SRP on the basis of somatosensory profiles. METHODS: Patients with LBP (n = 54) were assessed with quantitative sensory testing in the area of LBP and, in cases of RAD, additionally in the area of projecting pain. Questionnaires (PainDETECT®, EuroQol-5D, Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale, Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire for Back Pain, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, Short Form-12 Health Survey, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) were answered by all patients. RESULTS: Patients with RAD (n = 12) had higher pain intensity scores (numeric rating scale: 5.7 ± 1.5 vs 4.1 ± 2.2; P < 0.05) and higher PainDETECT scores (14.6 ± 6.13 vs 9.7 ± 6.2; P < 0.05) than did patients with aLBP and SRP (n = 42). Patients with RAD had a more pronounced loss of small-fiber function, increased mechanical hyperalgesia, and a trend toward increased sensitivity to thermal pain in the area of LBP compared with patients with aLBP and SRP. Within patients with RAD, sensory profiles of the area of projecting pain and the area of LBP did not differ. Pressure pain hyperalgesia (measured by pressure pain threshold) and loss of mechanical detection (measured by mechanical detection threshold) in combination with the PainDETECT items numbness and prickling reached the best predictive value in detecting a radiculopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RAD demonstrated more somatosensory abnormalities than did patients with aLBP and SRP, including increased mechanical hyperalgesia and a loss of mechanical detection. The combination of pressure pain threshold, mechanical detection threshold, numbness, and prickling in the area of LBP can be a time-efficient tool to identify patients with RAD.

Proposed Mobility Assessments with Simultaneous Full-Body Inertial Measurement Units and Optical Motion Capture in Healthy Adults and Neurological Patients for Future Validation Studies: Study Protocol.

Healthy adults and neurological patients show unique mobility patterns over the course of their lifespan and disease. Quantifying these mobility patterns could support diagnosing, tracking disease progression and measuring response to treatment. This quantification can be done with wearable technology, such as inertial measurement units (IMUs). Before IMUs can be used to quantify mobility, algorithms need to be developed and validated with age and disease-specific datasets. This study proposes a protocol for a dataset that can be used to develop and validate IMU-based mobility algorithms for healthy adults (18-60 years), healthy older adults (>60 years), and patients with Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, a symptomatic stroke and chronic low back pain. All participants will be measured simultaneously with IMUs and a 3D optical motion capture system while performing standardized mobility tasks and non-standardized activities of daily living. Specific clinical scales and questionnaires will be collected. This study aims at building the largest dataset for the development and validation of IMU-based mobility algorithms for healthy adults and neurological patients. It is anticipated to provide this dataset for further research use and collaboration, with the ultimate goal to bring IMU-based mobility algorithms as quickly as possible into clinical trials and clinical routine.

Cold-evoked potentials in Fabry disease and polyneuropathy.

Background: Fabry disease (FD) causes cold-evoked pain and impaired cold perception through small fiber damage, which also occurs in polyneuropathies (PNP) of other origins. The integrity of thinly myelinated fibers and the spinothalamic tract is assessable by cold-evoked potentials (CEPs). In this study, we aimed to assess the clinical value of CEP by investigating its associations with pain, autonomic measures, sensory loss, and neuropathic signs. Methods: CEPs were examined at the hand and foot dorsum of patients with FD (n = 16) and PNP (n = 21) and healthy controls (n = 23). Sensory phenotyping was performed using quantitative sensory testing (QST). The painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ), FabryScan, and measures for the autonomic nervous system were applied. Group comparisons and correlation analyses were performed. Results: CEPs of 87.5% of the FD and 85.7% of the PNP patients were eligible for statistical analysis. In all patients combined, CEP data correlated significantly with cold detection loss, PDQ items, pain, and autonomic measures. Abnormal CEP latency in FD patients was associated with an abnormal heart frequency variability item (r = -0.684; adjusted p = 0.04). In PNP patients, CEP latency correlated significantly with PDQ items, and CEP amplitude correlated with autonomic measures (r = 0.688, adjusted p = 0.008; r = 0.619, adjusted p = 0.024). Furthermore, mechanical pain thresholds differed significantly between FD (gain range) and PNP patients (loss range) (p = 0.01). Conclusions: Abnormal CEPs were associated with current pain, neuropathic signs and symptoms, and an abnormal function of the autonomic nervous system. The latter has not been mirrored by QST parameters. Therefore, CEPs appear to deliver a wider spectrum of information on the sensory nervous system than QST alone.

Test-retest reliability of a simple bedside-quantitative sensory testing battery for chronic neuropathic pain.

Introduction: The sensory phenotype is believed to provide information about the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and to be used in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. However, the use of standardized quantitative sensory testing (QST) protocols is limited due to high expenditures of time and costs. Thus, a simple bedside-QST battery was recently developed showing good agreement when compared with laboratory QST. The aim of this study was to preliminary validate this bedside-QST protocol. Methods: Patients experiencing chronic pain with neuropathic features (n = 60) attended 3 visits. During the first visit, laboratory QST and bedside-QST were performed by the same trained investigator. Three hours and 3 weeks later, bedside-QST was repeated. Patients completed questionnaires regarding their pain (intensity, quality), depression/anxiety, and quality of life. Test-retest reliability and convergent/divergent validity were investigated. Results: Most of the bedside-QST parameters, including also those recommended in our first study as being indicative for sensory phenotypes, revealed a moderate to excellent test-retest reliability. Overall, results for short-term reliability and interval-scaled parameters were slightly better. Most of the bedside-QST parameters did not correlate with the depression and anxiety score, suggesting a good divergent validity. Conclusions: Bedside-QST has good criterion and divergent validity as well as reliability. This battery consists of 5 low-cost devices that can be quickly and easily used to characterize the sensory phenotype of patients with neuropathic pain. A combination of bedside-QST parameters can be used to investigate patients' subgroups with specific pathophysiological mechanisms and to identify treatment responders.

Bedside testing for precision pain medicine.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In recent years, the identification of therapy responders has become an increasing focus of pain research. On the basis of laboratory quantitative sensory testing, subgroups of patients were identified, which have been shown to predict treatment response. However, the high cost and time expenditure limits the use of these lab-QST protocols in clinical practice and large clinical trials. RECENT FINDINGS: Recently, different bedside testing protocols were developed as easy-to-use alternative for lab-QST. In addition, patients can be subgrouped based on their symptoms by use of patient-reported outcome measures. First results suggest that these approaches can be used to stratify patients into pathophysiological-plausible subgroups predictive for treatment response. SUMMARY: This review presents recently developed bedside approaches that can be implemented as stratification tools in future clinical trials to realize individualized pain medicine. Being complementary rather than replaceable, future studies should combine questionnaires and sensory testing and apply them prospectively in large clinical trials.

Sensory bedside testing: a simple stratification approach for sensory phenotyping.

INTRODUCTION: Stratification of patients according to the individual sensory phenotype has been suggested a promising method to identify responders for pain treatment. However, many state-of-the-art sensory testing procedures are expensive or time-consuming. OBJECTIVES: Therefore, this study aimed to present a selection of easy-to-use bedside devices. METHODS: In total, 73 patients (39 m/34 f) and 20 controls (11 m/9 f) received a standardized laboratory quantitative sensory testing (QST) and a bedside-QST. In addition, 50 patients were tested by a group of nonexperienced investigators to address the impact of training. The sensitivity, specificity, and receiver-operating characteristics were analyzed for each bedside-QST parameter as compared to laboratory QST. Furthermore, the patients' individual sensory phenotype (ie, cluster) was determined using laboratory QST, to select bedside-QST parameters most indicative for a correct cluster allocation. RESULTS: The bedside-QST parameters "loss of cold perception to 22°C metal," "hypersensitivity towards 45°C metal," "loss of tactile perception to Q-tip and 0.7 mm CMS hair," as well as "the allodynia sum score" indicated good sensitivity and specificity (ie, ≳70%). Results of interrater variability indicated that training is necessary for individual parameters (ie, CMS 0.7). For the cluster assessment, the respective bedside quantitative sensory testing (QST) parameter combination indicated the following agreements as compared to laboratory QST stratification: excellent for "sensory loss" (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.91), good for "thermal hyperalgesia" (AUC = 0.83), and fair for "mechanical hyperalgesia" (AUC = 0.75). CONCLUSION: This study presents a selection of bedside parameters to identify the individual sensory phenotype as cost and time efficient as possible.

Bridging the Gap Between Vessels and Nerves in Fabry Disease.

PURPOSE: Fabry disease frequently includes pain as an early disease feature, which was characterized as a dysfunctional processing of somatosensory information in various studies. The pathomechanism involves the mutation in the x-chromosomal GLA-gene and a consequent reduction of the α-galactosidase. This results in an insufficient reduction of globotriaosylceramide (GL3). Interestingly, an accumulation of GL3 was shown in both vascular endothelial cells and nerve tissue. This implicates that both an endothelial and nerve-dependent dysfunction may be considered as prominent mechanisms in pain pathogeneses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The exploration of endothelial and C-fiber-dependent microcirculatory changes was conducted in a healthy cohort (n = 22) and in patients with polyneuropathy (n = 21) and Fabry disease (n = 15). Microcirculatory measurements were conducted using a laser speckle contrast analysis (LASCA) in combination with a thermoprobe controlling system, which applied a constant heat stimulus (42°C). Additionally, nerve fiber function was assessed via Quantitative Sensory Testing and heart rate variability (HRV). RESULTS: The results indicated a characteristic perfusion profile in the control group as well as both patient groups. Fabry patients had the smallest increase of endothelial-dependent perfusion as compared to the others [% increase as compared to Fabry: control + 129% (p = 0.002), PNP + 126% (p = 0.019)]. The sensory testing indicated a dysfunctional processing of A-delta fibers in Fabry disease as compared to healthy controls [cold detection threshold (CDT): p = 0.004, mechanical pain threshold (MPT): p = 0.007] and PNP patients (MPT: p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results point to both an endothelial and a nerve-dependent dysfunction in Fabry disease. Therefore, not only direct changes in nerve fiber tissue may contribute to an altered sensory processing. Indeed, evidence of a perfusion change in vasa nervorum could also contribute to the dysfunctional processing of sensory information, which likely occurs under physical stress.

Stratification of patients with unclassified pain in the FabryScan database.

PURPOSE: Fabry disease belongs to lysosomal storage disorders and can be successfully treated today. On the contrary, the correct diagnostic classification of its symptoms can be challenging and most patients suffer from pain for years, until they are diagnosed correctly. The aim of this project was to characterize patients with unclassified extremity pain and to present a simple algorithm for a retrospective stratification approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The FabryScan includes a bedside-test and a questionnaire, consisting of 10 symptom-orientated and anamnestic questions. For the stratification of patients according to the likelihood for Fabry disease two different approaches were conducted. First, a prospective subgrouping based on the previously invented FabryScan evaluation system was conducted. The second retrospective approach consisted of a factor analysis and a subsequent two-way cluster analysis. Further on, 4 patients diagnosed with Fabry disease were stratified according to both approaches. RESULTS: In total, 183 completed datasets were included in the statistical analysis. The first approach prospectively classified patients into 3 subgroups (n=40 [likely], n=96 [possible], n=47 [unlikely]) according to the FabryScan evaluation system. The second approach retrospectively stratified patients into 3 subgroups (n=47 [cluster 1], n=95 [cluster 2], n=41 [cluster 3]). Finally, the Fabry patients were sorted to the subgroups, indicative for the highest possibility of Fabry disease in both stratification approaches A and B. CONCLUSION: Both stratification approaches sorted patients with confirmed Fabry disease to the subgroups, indicative for the highest likelihood for Fabry. These results indicate validity of the initially selected FabryScan outcome parameters.

Sensory symptoms in low back pain-how do they matter?

OBJECTIVE: Successful treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP) is difficult in clinical practice and hard to measure in trials. One reason might be the use of insufficient outcome parameters. The aim was to investigate the importance of typical clinical characteristics of chronic LBP on QoL and functionality. METHODS: A total of 51 patients with chronic LBP (19 with, 32 without radiculopathy) were investigated with different questionnaires. RESULTS: Burdening symptoms differed in frequency, intensity and impairment of QoL and functionality between patients with and without radiculopathy and between the area of pain within the same patient, i.e. between back and leg. Symptoms of nerve affection such as prickling pain and numbness were rated higher in the area of radiating pain than on the back in radiculopathy, and typical neuropathic pain symptoms such as burning pain, prickling, spontaneous pain, and feeling of deep pressure and pain at the beginning of movement were rated with a higher impairment of QoL and functionality in patients with compared to those without radiculopathy. Furthermore, intensity, impairment of QoL, and functionality were not necessarily reported in association with one another: some patients were highly impaired in QoL or functionality, despite a moderate-to-low pain intensity, whereas others suffered from severe pain, but were less impaired in QoL or functionality. CONCLUSION: Results suggest the consideration of impairment of QoL and functionality in addition to symptom intensity for treatment evaluation of chronic LBP. This can help to improve overall well-being of the patients and enhance efficacy in clinical pain trials and patient-centered treatment.

Peripheral neuropathic pain: a mechanism-related organizing principle based on sensory profiles.

Patients with neuropathic pain are heterogeneous in etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical appearance. They exhibit a variety of pain-related sensory symptoms and signs (sensory profile). Different sensory profiles might indicate different classes of neurobiological mechanisms, and hence subgroups with different sensory profiles might respond differently to treatment. The aim of the investigation was to identify subgroups in a large sample of patients with neuropathic pain using hypothesis-free statistical methods on the database of 3 large multinational research networks (German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS), IMI-Europain, and Neuropain). Standardized quantitative sensory testing was used in 902 (test cohort) and 233 (validation cohort) patients with peripheral neuropathic pain of different etiologies. For subgrouping, we performed a cluster analysis using 13 quantitative sensory testing parameters. Three distinct subgroups with characteristic sensory profiles were identified and replicated. Cluster 1 (sensory loss, 42%) showed a loss of small and large fiber function in combination with paradoxical heat sensations. Cluster 2 (thermal hyperalgesia, 33%) was characterized by preserved sensory functions in combination with heat and cold hyperalgesia and mild dynamic mechanical allodynia. Cluster 3 (mechanical hyperalgesia, 24%) was characterized by a loss of small fiber function in combination with pinprick hyperalgesia and dynamic mechanical allodynia. All clusters occurred across etiologies but frequencies differed. We present a new approach of subgrouping patients with peripheral neuropathic pain of different etiologies according to intrinsic sensory profiles. These 3 profiles may be related to pathophysiological mechanisms and may be useful in clinical trial design to enrich the study population for treatment responders.

Sensitization of the Nociceptive System in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS-I) is characterized by sensory, motor and autonomic abnormalities without electrophysiological evidence of a nerve lesion. OBJECTIVE: Aims were to investigate how sensory, autonomic and motor function change in the course of the disease. METHODS: 19 CRPS-I patients (17 with acute, 2 with chronic CRPS, mean duration of disease 5.7±8.3, range 1-33 months) were examined with questionnaires (LANSS, NPS, MPI, Quick DASH, multiple choice list of descriptors for sensory, motor, autonomic symptoms), motor and autonomic tests as well as quantitative sensory testing according to the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain at two visits (baseline and 36±10.6, range 16-53 months later). RESULTS: CRPS-I patients had an improvement of sudomotor and vasomotor function, but still a great impairment of sensory and motor function upon follow-up. Although pain and mechanical detection improved upon follow-up, thermal and mechanical pain sensitivity increased, including the contralateral side. Increase in mechanical pain sensitivity and loss of mechanical detection were associated with presence of ongoing pain. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that patients with CRPS-I show a sensitization of the nociceptive system in the course of the disease, for which ongoing pain seems to be the most important trigger. They further suggest that measured loss of function in CRPS-I is due to pain-induced hypoesthesia rather than a minimal nerve lesion. In conclusion, this article gives evidence for a pronociceptive pain modulation profile developing in the course of CRPS and thus helps to assess underlying mechanisms of CRPS that contribute to the maintenance of patients' pain and disability.

Quantitative sensory testing in classical trigeminal neuralgia-a blinded study in patients with and without concomitant persistent pain.

The diagnostic criteria of the third International Classification of Headache Disorders state that there should be no neurological deficits in patients with classical trigeminal neuralgia (TN) at clinical examination. However, studies demonstrating sensory abnormalities at bedside examination in TN patients have questioned this. Our aim was to examine whether TN patients without sensory abnormalities at neurological examination have sensory abnormalities at quantitative sensory testing (QST) and whether there were any QST differences between TN with and without concomitant persistent pain. Thirty-six TN patients were investigated with the standardized QST protocol by the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain. The investigators were blinded to presence of concomitant persistent pain and symptomatic side. Based on comparison to the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain controls, z scores were calculated to process frequency analyses and Z-profiles. We found increased mechanical detection threshold on the symptomatic side (47.2% vs 0%, P = 0.008), asymptomatic side (33.3% vs 0%, P = 0.011), and hand (36% vs 0%, P < 0.001) in TN compared with controls. The Z-profiles demonstrated increased mechanical detection threshold on the symptomatic side compared with the asymptomatic side (-2.980 vs -2.166, P = 0.040). Thermal and mechanical hyperalgesia was detected bilaterally in the face and the hand. Trigeminal neuralgia patients with concomitant persistent pain tended to have higher mean z score values compared to TN with purely paroxysmal pain indicative of decreased detection thresholds. Trigeminal neuralgia patients with no sensory abnormalities at neurological examination had generalized subclinical hypoesthesia, which was more pronounced on the symptomatic side, and thermal and mechanical hyperalgesia. This could indicate pain-induced hypoesthesia and sensitization induced by central mechanisms.

Symptom profiles in the painDETECT Questionnaire in patients with peripheral neuropathic pain stratified according to sensory loss in quantitative sensory testing.

The painDETECT Questionnaire (PDQ) is commonly used as a screening tool to discriminate between neuropathic pain (NP) and nociceptive pain, based on the self-report of symptoms, including pain qualities, numbness, and pain to touch, cold, or heat. However, there are minimal data about whether the PDQ is differentially sensitive to different sensory phenotypes in NP. The aim of the study was to analyze whether the overall PDQ score or its items reflect phenotypes of sensory loss in NP as determined by quantitative sensory testing. An exploratory analysis in the Innovative Medicines Initiative Europain and Neuropain database was performed. Data records of 336 patients identified with NP were grouped into sensory profiles characterized by (1) no loss of sensation, (2) loss of thermal sensation, (3) loss of mechanical sensation, and (4) loss of thermal and mechanical sensation. painDETECT Questionnaire profiles were analyzed in a 2-factor analysis of variance. Patients with loss of thermal sensation (2 and 4) significantly more often reported pain evoked by light touch, and patients with loss of mechanical sensation (3 and 4) significantly more often reported numbness and significantly less often burning sensations and pain evoked by light touch. Although the PDQ was not designed to assess sensory loss, single items reflect thermal and/or mechanical sensory loss at group level, but because of substantial variability, the PDQ does not allow for individual allocation of patients into sensory profiles. It will be useful to develop screening tools according to the current definition of NP.

Phenotyping neuropathic pain patients: implications for individual therapy and clinical trials.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The sensory phenotype can be used as a surrogate marker of underlying mechanisms of pain generation and is assessed by tools like the Quantitative Sensory Testing, Patient Reported Outcomes or the Capsaicin Response Test. In order to establish an individualized, mechanism-based treatment of pain, it has to be demonstrated that subgroups of patients with a distinct sensory phenotype respond differently to a certain treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Retrospective analyses of several clinical trials revealed that the presence of certain somatosensory abnormalities in the painful area was associated with a better treatment outcome. Examples will be discussed in this article, showing that somatosensory phenotyping of patients with neuropathic pain is a promising method to subgroup patients in order to predict their response to treatment. SUMMARY: The discussed trials show the importance of the development of an individualized pain therapy. Up to now, no clinical trial has prospectively used the sensory phenotype as an inclusion or stratification criterion. Academic researchers and pharmaceutical industry should be encouraged to implement this approach in future trial designs.

Effects of acute postoperative pain on catecholamine plasma levels, hemodynamic parameters, and cardiac autonomic control.

Postoperative pain is often stated to be a significant contributor to a sympathetic stress response after surgery. However, hardly any evidence has been published to support this assumption. Hence it was the aim of this trial to investigate the relationship between postoperative pain and hemodynamic, endocrine, and autonomic parameters. A total of 85 postoperative patients in the recovery room were repeatedly asked to rate their pain on a numeric rating scale (NRS). Concurrently, the parameters of heart rate variability (HRV) were analysed, and mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) and respiration rate (RR) were recorded. Pain was categorized into no, mild, moderate, and severe. Blood samples were taken for epinephrine (EPI) and norepinephrine (NE) plasma level assessment at the time of recovery room admission and discharge, and each time pain was found decreased in categorized severity. A total of 239 pain readings were obtained. None of the investigated parameters correlated with NRS scores. NE was higher at NRS 5 to 10 vs. NRS 0 to 4 (mean [SEM]: 1009 [73] pg/mL vs. 872 [65] pg/mL; P<0.01). This was also found for MAP, but not for EPI or the parameters of HRV, HR, and RR. In contrast to common belief, the severity of postoperative pain does not appear to be associated with the degree of sympathetic stress response after surgery, and other factors such as surgical trauma may be more important. Importantly, the absence of signs of sympathetic stimulation cannot be seen as a guarantee for the absence of significant pain.