Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) is Reduced in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of CPM and the Role of Psychological Factors.

This systematic review summarises evidence assessing endogenous pain inhibition in people with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) compared with healthy controls using conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and offset analgesia (OA). Evidence regarding the role of psychological variables is also examined. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Four electronic databases were searched to retrieve studies assessing CPM or OA in adults diagnosed with IBS according to the ROME II/III criteria. Standardized mean differences were calculated for each study and a random effects model was used for meta-analysis. Eleven studies were included, 5 of which reported results on the relationship between CPM and psychological variables. None of the studies assessed OA. The risk of bias assessment found a lack of assessor blinding in all studies. The pooled effect estimate was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.40-1.40) indicating a significantly lower CPM effect in people with IBS compared with controls. This effect was reduced to 0.51 when 1 outlier was excluded from the analysis. In addition, reduced CPM responses were significantly correlated with higher anxiety (r=0.17 to 0.64), stress (r=0.63), and pain catastrophizing (r=0.38) in people with IBS; however, the evidence available was limited and the strength of these associations variable. Depression was not found to be associated with CPM in these IBS cohorts. The results of this review suggest that people with IBS, as a group, demonstrate reduced pain inhibition measured by CPM. The preliminary evidence about the association between psychological factors and CPM warrants further investigations.

Prognostic value of quantitative sensory testing in low back pain: a systematic review of the literature.

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) measures have recently been shown to predict outcomes in various musculoskeletal and pain conditions. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the emerging body of evidence investigating the prognostic value of QST measures in people with low back pain (LBP). The protocol for this review was prospectively registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. An electronic search of six databases was conducted from inception to October 2015. Experts in the field were contacted to retrieve additional unpublished data. Studies were included if they were prospective longitudinal in design, assessed at least one QST measure in people with LBP, assessed LBP status at follow-up, and reported the association of QST data with LBP status at follow-up. Statistical pooling of results was not possible due to heterogeneity between studies. Of 6,408 references screened after duplicates removed, three studies were finally included. None of them reported a significant association between the QST measures assessed and the LBP outcome. Three areas at high risk of bias were identified which potentially compromise the validity of these results. Due to the paucity of available studies and the methodological shortcomings identified, it remains unknown whether QST measures are predictive of outcome in LBP.

Descending pain modulation in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common functional gastrointestinal disorder. While abdominal pain is a dominant symptom of IBS, many sufferers also report widespread hypersensitivity and present with other chronic pain conditions. The presence of widespread hypersensitivity and extra-intestinal pain conditions suggests central nervous dysfunction. While central nervous system dysfunction may involve the spinal cord (central sensitisation) and brain, this review will focus on one brain mechanism, descending pain modulation. METHOD/DESIGN: We will conduct a comprehensive search for the articles indexed in the databases Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial (CENTRAL) from their inception to August 2015, that report on any aspect of descending pain modulation in irritable bowel syndrome. Two independent reviewers will screen studies for eligibility, assess risk of bias and extract relevant data. Results will be tabulated and, if possible, a meta-analysis will be carried out. DISCUSSION: The systematic review outlined in this protocol aims to summarise current knowledge regarding descending pain modulation in IBS. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015024284.

Longstanding neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury is refractory to transcranial direct current stimulation: a randomized controlled trial.

Neuropathic pain remains one of the most difficult consequences of spinal cord injury (SCI) to manage. It is a major cause of suffering and adds to the physical, emotional, and societal impact of the injury. Despite the use of the best available treatments, two thirds of people experiencing neuropathic pain after SCI do not achieve satisfactory pain relief. This study was undertaken in response to a recent clinical trial reporting short-term, clinically significant reductions in neuropathic SCI pain with primary motor cortex transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). In this investigation, we aimed to build on this previous clinical trial by extending the assessment period to determine the short-, medium-, and long-term efficacy of tDCS for the treatment of neuropathic pain after SCI. We found that, contrary to previous reports, after 5 tDCS treatment periods, mean pain intensity and unpleasantness rating were not significantly different from initial assessment. That is, in this trial tDCS did not provide any pain relief in subjects with neuropathic SCI pain (n=10). A similar lack of effect was also seen after sham treatment. Because the injury duration in this study was significantly greater than that of previous investigations, it is possible that tDCS is an effective analgesic only in individuals with relatively recent injuries and pain. Future investigations comparing a range of injury durations are required if we are to determine whether this is indeed the case.