Neuronal differences between chronic low back pain and depression regarding long-term habituation to pain.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies of experimental pain are rare and little is known about the differences regarding sensitization and habituation over longer periods in patients with chronic pain or depression compared with controls. METHODS: We used a standardized longitudinal painful heat paradigm that was designed to induce long-term habituation in 19 patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), 21 patients with depression (DEP) and 21 healthy participants (controls) over a time course of eight consecutive days. We applied functional magnetic resonance imaging on the first and last day of this period and after 3 months. RESULTS: Although the pain paradigm was standardized, patients with DEP exhibited significantly higher pain thresholds and a trend to higher pain ratings and, in functional imaging, showed less activation of the operculum and the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) as compared to patients with CLBP and controls. Conversely, patients with CLBP showed increased activation in the anterior insula and parietal operculum as compared to patients with DEP and controls. Within session, all participants sensitized to pain, which was associated with higher activation levels in the thalamus, amygdala, midcingulate cortex, and sensory and motor areas. However, patients with depression showed significantly less activation in midbrain and brainstem areas. CONCLUSION: Given that pain and depression potentiate each other clinically, our data suggest that this may involve different cortical pain areas.

Association between cortisol awakening response and memory function in major depression.

BACKGROUND: While impaired memory and altered cortisol secretion are characteristic features of major depression, much less is known regarding the impact of antidepressant medication. We examined whether the cortisol awakening response (CAR) is increased in depressed patients with and without medication compared with healthy controls (HC) and whether CAR is associated with memory function in each group. METHOD: We examined 21 patients with major depression without medication, 20 depressed patients on antidepressant treatment, and 41 age-, sex- and education-matched healthy subjects. We tested verbal (Auditory Verbal Learning Task) and visuospatial (Rey figure) memory and measured CAR on two consecutive days. RESULTS: Patient groups did not differ in severity of depression. We found a significant effect of group (p = 0.03) for CAR. Unmedicated patients exhibited a greater CAR compared with medicated patients (p = 0.04) with no differences between patient groups and HC. We found a significant effect of group for verbal (p = 0.03) and non-verbal memory (p = 0.04). Unmedicated patients performed worse compared with medicated patients and HC in both memory domains. Medicated patients and HC did not differ. Regression analyses revealed a negative association between CAR and memory function in depressed patients, but not in HC. CONCLUSIONS: While in unmedicated depressed patients the magnitude of CAR is associated with impaired memory, medicated patients showed a smaller CAR and unimpaired cognitive function compared with HC. Our findings are compatible with the idea that antidepressants reduce CAR and partially restore memory function even if depressive psychopathology is still present.