Search

Background and Objective: Functional magnetic resonance imaging, in conjunction with models of peripheral and/or central sensitization, has been used to assess analgesic efficacy in healthy humans. This review aims to summarize the use of these techniques to characterize brain mechanisms of hyperalgesia/allodynia and to evaluate the efficacy of analgesics. Databases and Data Treatment: Searches were performed (PubMed‐Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science and Clinicaltrials.gov) to identify and review studies. A co‐ordinate based meta‐analysis (CBMA) was conducted to quantify neural activity that was reported across multiple independent studies in the hyperalgesic condition compared to control, using GingerALE software. Results: Of 217 publications, 30 studies met the inclusion criteria. They studied nine different models of hyperalgesia/allodynia assessed in the primary (14) or secondary hyperalgesia zone (16). Twenty‐three studies focused on neural correlates of hyperalgesic conditions and showed consistent changes in the somatosensory cortex, prefrontal cortices, insular cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, thalamus and brainstem. The CBMA on 12 studies that reported activation coordinates for a contrast comparing the hyperalgesic state to control produced six activation clusters (significant at false discovery rate of 0.05) with more peaks for secondary (17.7) than primary zones (7.3). Seven studies showed modulation of brain activity by analgesics in five of the clusters but also in four additional regions. Conclusions: This meta‐analysis revealed substantial but incomplete overlap between brain areas related to neural mechanisms of hyperalgesia and those reflecting the efficacy of analgesic drugs. Studies testing in the secondary zone were more sensitive to evaluate analgesic efficacy on central sensitization at brainstem or thalamocortical levels. Significance: Experimental pain models that provide a surrogate for features of pathological pain conditions in healthy humans and functional imaging techniques are both highly valuable research tools. This review shows that when used together, they provide a wealth of information about brain activity during pain states and analgesia. These tools are promising candidates to help bridge the gap between animal and human studies, to improve translatability and provide opportunities for identification of new targets for back‐translation to animal studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic pain is thought to arise because of maladaptive changes occurring within the peripheral nervous system and CNS. The transition from acute to chronic pain is known to involve the spinal cord (Woolf and Salter, 2000). Therefore, to investigate altered human spinal cord function and translate results obtained from other species, a noninvasive neuroimaging technique is desirable. We have investigated the functional response in the cervical spinal cord of 18 healthy human subjects (aged 22- 40 years) to noxious thermal and non-noxious tactile stimulation of the left and right forearms. Physiological noise, which is a significant source of signal variability in the spinal cord, was accounted for in the general linear model. Group analysis, performed using a mixed-effects model, revealed distinct regions of activity that were dependent on both the side and the type of stimulation. In particular, thermal stimulation on the medial aspect of the wrist produced activity within the C6/C5 segment ipsilateral to the side of stimulation. Similar to data recorded in animals (Fitzgerald, 1982), painful thermal stimuli produced increased ipsilateral and decreased contralateral blood flow, which may reflect, respectively, excitatory and inhibitory processes. Nonpainful punctate stimulation of the thenar eminence provoked more diffuse activity but was still ipsilateral to the side of stimulation. These results present the first noninvasive evidence for a lateralized response to noxious and non-noxious stimuli in the human spinal cord. The development of these techniques opens the path to understanding, at a subjectspecific level, central sensitization processes that contribute to chronic pain states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preclinical evidence suggests that opioid withdrawal induces central sensitization (CS) that is maintained by supraspinal contributions from the descending pain modulatory system (DPMS). Here, in healthy human subjects we use functional magnetic resonance imaging to study the supraspinal activity during the withdrawal period of the opioid remifentanil. We used a crossover design and thermal stimuli on uninjured skin to demonstrate opioid withdrawal-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) without a CS-inducing peripheral stimulus. Saline was used in the control arm to account for effects of time. OIH in this injury-free model was observed in a subset of the healthy subjects (responders). Only in these subjects did opioid infusion and withdrawal induce a rise in activity in the mesencephalic-pontine reticular formation (MPRF), an area of the DPMS that has been previously shown to be involved in states of CS in humans, which became significant during the withdrawal phase compared with nonresponders. Paradoxically, this opioid withdrawal-induced rise in MPRF activity shows a significant negative correlation with the behavioral OIH score indicating a predominant inhibitory role of the MPRF in the responders. These data illustrate that in susceptible individuals central mechanisms appear to regulate the expression of OIH in humans in the absence of tissue injury, which might have relevance for functional pain syndromes where a peripheral origin for the pain is difficult to identify. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Clinical and laboratory studies demonstrate that placebo and nocebo effects influence various symptoms and conditions after the administration of both inert and active treatments., Objective: There is an increasing need for up-to-date recommendations on how to inform patients about placebo and nocebo effects in clinical practice and train clinicians how to disclose this information., Methods: Based on previous clinical recommendations concerning placebo and nocebo effects, a 3-step, invitation-only Delphi study was conducted among an interdisciplinary group of internationally recognized experts. The study consisted of open- and closed-ended survey questions followed by a final expert meeting. The surveys were subdivided into 3 parts: (1) informing patients about placebo effects, (2) informing patients about nocebo effects, and (3) training clinicians how to communicate this information to the patients., Results: There was consensus that communicating general information about placebo and nocebo effects to patients (e.g., explaining their role in treatment) could be beneficial, but that such information needs to be adjusted to match the specific clinical context (e.g., condition and treatment). Experts also agreed that training clinicians to communicate about placebo and nocebo effects should be a regular and integrated part of medical education that makes use of multiple formats, including face-to-face and online modalities., Conclusions: The current 3-step Delphi study provides consensus-based recommendations and practical considerations for disclosures about placebo and nocebo effects in clinical practice. Future research is needed on how to optimally tailor information to specific clinical conditions and patients' needs, and on developing standardized disclosure training modules for clinicians., (© 2020 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)