Indication for spinal sensitization in chronic low back pain: mechanical hyperalgesia adjacent to but not within the most painful body area.

Introduction: In 85% of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), no specific pathoanatomical cause can be identified. Besides primary peripheral drivers within the lower back, spinal or supraspinal sensitization processes might contribute to the patients' pain. Objectives: The present study conceptualized the most painful area (MP) of patients with nonspecific CLBP as primarily affected area and assessed signs of peripheral, spinal, and supraspinal sensitization using quantitative sensory testing (QST) in MP, a pain-free area adjacent to MP (AD), and a remote, pain-free control area (CON). Methods: Fifty-nine patients with CLBP (51 years, SD = 16.6, 22 female patients) and 35 pain-free control participants individually matched for age, sex, and testing areas (49 years, SD = 17.5, 19 female participants) underwent a full QST protocol in MP and a reduced QST protocol assessing sensory gain in AD and CON. Quantitative sensory testing measures, except paradoxical heat sensations and dynamic mechanical allodynia (DMA), were Z-transformed to the matched control participants and tested for significance using Z-tests (α = 0.001). Paradoxical heat sensations and DMA occurrence were compared between cohorts using Fisher's exact tests (α = 0.05). The same analyses were performed with a high-pain and a low-pain CLBP subsample (50% quantile). Results: Patients showed cold and vibration hypoesthesia in MP (all Ps < 0.001) and mechanical hyperalgesia (P < 0.001) and more frequent DMA (P = 0.044) in AD. The results were mainly driven by the high-pain CLBP subsample. In CON, no sensory alterations were observed. Conclusion: Mechanical hyperalgesia and DMA adjacent to but not within MP, the supposedly primarily affected area, might reflect secondary hyperalgesia originating from spinal sensitization in patients with CLBP.

The Role of Pain Expectations in the Development of Secondary Pinprick Hypersensitivity: Behavioral-Neurophysiological Evidence and the Role of Pain-Related Fear.

Secondary mechanical hypersensitivity, a common symptom of neuropathic pain, reflects increased responsiveness of nociceptive pathways and can be induced temporarily in healthy volunteers using high-frequency electrical stimulation of the skin. Expectations modulate acute pain perception and fear of pain has been shown to attenuate and amplify the placebo and nocebo effects, respectively. However, the role of expectations and fear in the development of mechanical secondary hypersensitivity remains unclear. The modulatory role of fear and expectations in the development of mechanical secondary hypersensitivity remains so far mainly correlational. Here, we randomly assigned healthy participants (women) to a placebo, nocebo, or control group. In the experimental groups, participants' expectations of pain were manipulated using verbal suggestions accompanied by an inert treatment. Fear of pain was evaluated both in terms of fear of pain and via questionnaires. Sensitivity to mechanical stimulation was assessed by self-reported pinprick ratings before and after high-frequency stimulation; pinprick-evoked potentials elicited by the stimulation were recorded. The placebo group developed the least mechanical secondary hypersensitivity (smaller proximal-distal spread), while the nocebo group developed the most, but only when outliers were excluded. Higher expectations of pain predicted a greater development of mechanical secondary hypersensitivity. Anticipatory pain-related fear only mediated the relationship between unpleasantness expectations and perceived pinprick unpleasantness. Dispositional fear of pain moderated the relationship between expectations and the perceived intensity and unpleasantness of pinpricks. No group differences were observed in pinprick-evoked potentials. We provide preliminary evidence that both expectations and fear impact the development of mechanical secondary hypersensitivity. PERSPECTIVE: Expectations of pain may influence the development of secondary mechanical hypersensitivity. This effect is moderated by dispositional fear of pain and partially mediated by situational fear of pain.

Priming of the autonomic nervous system after an experimental human pain model.

Modulated autonomic responses to noxious stimulation have been reported in experimental and clinical pain. These effects are likely mediated by nociceptive sensitization, but may also, more simply reflect increased stimulus-associated arousal. To disentangle between sensitization- and arousal-mediated effects on autonomic responses to noxious input, we recorded sympathetic skin responses (SSRs) in response to 10 pinprick and heat stimuli before (PRE) and after (POST) an experimental heat pain model to induce secondary hyperalgesia (EXP) and a control model (CTRL) in 20 healthy females. Pinprick and heat stimuli were individually adapted for pain perception (4/10) across all assessments. Heart rate, heart rate variability, and skin conductance level (SCL) were assessed before, during, and after the experimental heat pain model. Both pinprick- and heat-induced SSRs habituated from PRE to POST in CTRL, but not EXP (P = 0.033). Background SCL (during stimuli application) was heightened in EXP compared with CTRL condition during pinprick and heat stimuli (P = 0.009). Our findings indicate that enhanced SSRs after an experimental pain model are neither fully related to subjective pain, as SSRs dissociated from perceptual responses, nor to nociceptive sensitization, as SSRs were enhanced for both modalities. Our findings can, however, be explained by priming of the autonomic nervous system during the experimental pain model, which makes the autonomic nervous system more susceptible to noxious input. Taken together, autonomic readouts have the potential to objectively assess not only nociceptive sensitization but also priming of the autonomic nervous system, which may be involved in the generation of distinct clinical pain phenotypes.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The facilitation of pain-induced sympathetic skin responses observed after experimentally induced central sensitization is unspecific to the stimulation modality and thereby unlikely solely driven by nociceptive sensitization. In addition, these enhanced pain-induced autonomic responses are also not related to higher stimulus-associated arousal, but rather a general priming of the autonomic nervous system. Hence, autonomic readouts may be able to detect generalized hyperexcitability in chronic pain, beyond the nociceptive system, which may contribute to clinical pain phenotypes.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Non-pharmacological Methods to Manipulate Experimentally Induced Secondary Hypersensitivity.

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effects of non-pharmacological manipulations on experimentally induced secondary hypersensitivity in pain-free humans. We investigated the magnitude (change/difference in follow-up ratings from pre-manipulation ratings) of secondary hypersensitivity (primary outcome), and surface area of secondary hypersensitivity (secondary outcome), in 27 studies representing 847 participants. Risk of bias assessment concluded most studies (23 of 27) had an unclear or high risk of performance and detection bias. Further, 2 (of 27) studies had a high risk of measurement bias. Datasets were pooled by the method of manipulation and outcome. The magnitude of secondary hypersensitivity was decreased by diverting attention, anodal transcranial direct current stimulation, or emotional disclosure; increased by directing attention toward the induction site, nicotine deprivation, or negative suggestion; and unaffected by cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation or thermal change. Area of secondary hypersensitivity was decreased by anodal transcranial direct current stimulation, emotional disclosure, cognitive behavioral therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, placebo analgesia, or spinal manipulation; increased by directing attention to the induction site, nicotine deprivation, or sleep disruption (in males only); and unaffected by cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation, thermal change, acupuncture, or electroacupuncture. Meta-analytical pooling was only appropriate for studies that used transcranial direct current stimulation or hyperbaric oxygen therapy, given the high clinical heterogeneity among the studies and unavailability of data. The evidence base for this question remains small. We discuss opportunities to improve methodological rigor including manipulation checks, structured blinding strategies, control conditions or time points, and public sharing of raw data. PERSPECTIVE: We described the effects of several non-pharmacological manipulations on experimentally induced secondary hypersensitivity in humans. By shedding light on the potential for non-pharmacological therapies to influence secondary hypersensitivity, it provides a foundation for the development and testing of targeted therapies for secondary hypersensitivity.

No Evidence That Working Memory Modulates the Plasticity of the Nociceptive System, as Measured by Secondary Mechanical Hypersensitivity.

The effect of cognition on the plasticity of the nociceptive system remains controversial. In this study, we examined whether working memory can buffer against the development of secondary hypersensitivity. Thirty-five healthy women participated in 3 experimental conditions. In each condition, they underwent electrical stimulation of the skin for 2 minutes (middle-frequency electrical stimulation [MFS]), which induces secondary hypersensitivity. During MFS, participants executed either an individually tailored and rewarded n-back task (working memory condition), a rewarded reaction-time task (non-working memory condition), or no task at all (control condition). Before and after MFS, participants rated the self-reported intensity and unpleasantness of mechanical pinprick stimuli. Fear of MFS was also assessed. Heart rate variability was measured to examine potential differences between the 3 conditions and steady-state evoked potentials to the electrical stimulation were recorded to investigate differences in cortical responses. We report no significant difference in hypersensitivity between the 3 conditions. Moreover, engaging in the cognitive tasks did not affect the heart rate variability or the steady-state evoked potentials. Interestingly, higher fear of MFS predicted greater hypersensitivity. In conclusion, we found no evidence that working memory affects the plasticity of the nociceptive system, yet pain-related fear plays a role. PERSPECTIVE: This study shows that the execution of a cognitive task, irrespective of cognitive load or working memory, does not significantly modulate the development of secondary hypersensitivity, heart rate variability, or steady-state evoked potentials. However, higher pain-related fear seems to contribute to greater hypersensitivity.

No evidence for an effect of selective spatial attention on the development of secondary hyperalgesia: A replication study.

Central sensitization refers to the increased responsiveness of nociceptive neurons in the central nervous system after repeated or sustained peripheral nociceptor activation. It is hypothesized to play a key role in the development of chronic pain. A hallmark of central sensitization is an increased sensitivity to noxious mechanical stimuli extending beyond the injured location, known as secondary hyperalgesia. For its ability to modulate the transmission and the processing of nociceptive inputs, attention could constitute a promising target to prevent central sensitization and the development of chronic pain. It was recently shown that the experimental induction of central sensitization at both forearms of healthy volunteers using bilateral high-frequency electrocutaneous stimulation (HFS), can be modulated by encouraging participants to selectively focus their attention to one arm, to the detriment of the other arm, resulting in a greater secondary hyperalgesia on the attended arm as compared to the unattended one. Given the potential value of the question being addressed, we conducted a preregistered replication study in a well-powered independent sample to assess the robustness of the effect, i.e., the modulatory role of spatial attention on the induction of central sensitization. This hypothesis was tested using a double-blind, within-subject design. Sixty-seven healthy volunteers performed a task that required focusing attention toward one forearm to discriminate innocuous vibrotactile stimuli while HFS was applied on both forearms simultaneously. Our results showed a significant increase in mechanical sensitivity directly and 20 min after HFS. However, in contrast to the previous study, we did not find a significant difference in the development of secondary hyperalgesia between the attended vs. unattended arms. Our results question whether spatial selective attention affects the development of secondary hyperalgesia. Alternatively, the non-replication could be because the bottom-up capture of attention caused by the HFS-mediated sensation was too strong in comparison to the top-down modulation exerted by the attentional task. In other words, the task was not engaging enough and the HFS pulses, including those on the unattended arm, were too salient to allow a selective focus on one arm and modulate nociceptive processing.

The influence of a manipulation of threat on experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia.

Pain is thought to be influenced by the threat value of the particular context in which it occurs. However, the mechanisms by which a threat achieves this influence on pain are unclear. Here, we explore how threat influences experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia, which is thought to be a manifestation of central sensitization. We developed an experimental study to investigate the effect of a manipulation of threat on experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia in 26 healthy human adults (16 identifying as female; 10 as male). We induced secondary hyperalgesia at both forearms using high-frequency electrical stimulation. Prior to the induction, we used a previously successful method to manipulate threat of tissue damage at one forearm (threat site). The effect of the threat manipulation was determined by comparing participant-rated anxiety, perceived threat, and pain during the experimental induction of secondary hyperalgesia, between the threat and control sites. We hypothesized that the threat site would show greater secondary hyperalgesia (primary outcome) and greater surface area (secondary outcome) of induced secondary hyperalgesia than the control site. Despite a thorough piloting procedure to test the threat manipulation, our data showed no main effect of site on pain, anxiety, or threat ratings during high-frequency electrical stimulation. In the light of no difference in threat between sites, the primary and secondary hypotheses cannot be tested. We discuss reasons why we were unable to replicate the efficacy of this established threat manipulation in our sample, including: (1) competition between threats, (2) generalization of learned threat value, (3) safety cues, (4) trust, and requirements for participant safety, (5) sampling bias, (6) sample-specific habituation to threat, and (7) implausibility of (sham) skin examination and report. Better strategies to manipulate threat are required for further research on the mechanisms by which threat influences pain.

Priming of central and peripheral mechanisms with heat and cutaneous capsaicin facilitates secondary hyperalgesia to high-frequency electrical stimulation.

Heat/capsaicin sensitization and electrical high-frequency stimulation (HFS) are well-known models of secondary hyperalgesia, a phenomenon related to chronic pain conditions. This study investigated whether priming with heat/capsaicin would facilitate hyperalgesia to HFS in healthy subjects. Heat/capsaicin priming consisted of a 45°C heat stimulation for 5 min followed by a topical capsaicin patch (4 × 4 cm) for 30 min on the volar forearm of 20 subjects. HFS (100 Hz, 5 times 1 s, minimum 1.5 mA) was subsequently delivered through a transcutaneous pin electrode approximately 1.5 cm proximal to the heat/capsaicin application. Two sessions were applied in a crossover design; traditional HFS (HFS) and heat/capsaicin sensitization followed by HFS (HFS + HEAT/CAPS). Heat pain threshold (HPT), mechanical pain sensitivity (MPS), and superficial blood perfusion were assessed at baseline, after capsaicin removal, and up to 40 min after HFS. MPS was assessed with pin-prick stimulation (128 mN and 256 mN) in the area adjacent to both HFS and heat/capsaicin, distal but adjacent to heat/capsaicin and in a distal control area. HPT was assessed in the area of heat/capsaicin. Higher sensitivity to 128 mN pin-prick stimulation (difference from baseline and control area) was observed in the HFS + HEAT/CAPS session than in the HFS session 20 and 30 min after HFS. Furthermore, sensitivity was increased after HFS + HEAT/CAPS compared with after heat/capsaicin in the area adjacent to both paradigms, but not in the area distal to heat/capsaicin. Results indicate that heat/capsaicin causes priming of the central and peripheral nervous system, which facilitates secondary mechanical hyperalgesia to HFS.NEW & NOTEWORTHY High-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS) and heat/capsaicin sensitization are well-known models of secondary hyperalgesia. The results from the current study indicate that increased sensitivity to 128 mN pin-prick stimulation can be obtained when HFS is delivered following an already established heightened central hyperexcitability provoked by heat/capsaicin sensitization.

Evaluation of Secondary Thermal Hyperalgesia Resulting from Pulpal Inflammation in Patients with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis.

INTRODUCTION: Inflammation can lead to hyperalgesia and allodynia by activation or sensitization of peripheral and central nervous system neurons. This study aimed to assess the occurrence of secondary thermal hyperalgesia in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (SIP). METHODS: The cold sensitivity test (visual analog scale) was performed for the tooth with SIP, its adjacent sound tooth, the same sound tooth in the opposite jaw, and the contralateral sound tooth in the opposite quadrant of the same jaw. Next, the tooth with SIP underwent root canal treatment, and 3 weeks later, after complete elimination of pain, the teeth underwent cold sensitivity testing again. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients, including 41 women and 23 men 18-65 years old, were evaluated in this study. The response to the cold sensitivity test significantly decreased in the tooth with SIP (P < .001), its adjacent sound tooth (P < .001), and the same sound tooth in the opposite jaw (P = .004) but not in the contralateral sound tooth in the opposite quadrant of the same jaw (P = .45) after endodontic treatment. No significant difference was noted between men and women in the groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Hypersensitivity to cold test due to pulpal inflammation can also result in exaggerated response of the adjacent sound tooth and the same tooth in the opposite jaw to cold sensitivity test; these observations can be explained by the central and peripheral sensitization mechanisms.

Exposure to an Immersive Virtual Reality Environment can Modulate Perceptual Correlates of Endogenous Analgesia and Central Sensitization in Healthy Volunteers.

Virtual reality (VR) has been shown to produce analgesic effects during different experimental and clinical pain states. Despite this, the top-down mechanisms are still poorly understood. In this study, we examined the influence of both a real and sham (ie, the same images in 2D) immersive arctic VR environment on conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and in a human surrogate model of central sensitization in 38 healthy volunteers. CPM and acute heat pain thresholds were assessed before and during VR/sham exposure in the absence of any sensitization. In a follow-on study, we used the cutaneous high frequency stimulation model of central sensitization and measured changes in mechanical pain sensitivity in an area of heterotopic sensitization before and during VR/sham exposure. There was an increase in CPM efficiency during the VR condition compared to baseline (P < .01). In the sham condition, there was a decrease in CPM efficiency compared to baseline (P < .01) and the real VR condition (P < .001). Neither real nor sham VR had any effect on pain ratings reported during the conditioning period or on heat pain threshold. There was also an attenuation of mechanical pain sensitivity during the VR condition indicating a lower sensitivity compared to sham (P < .05). We conclude that exposure to an immersive VR environment has no effect over acute pain thresholds but can modulate dynamic CPM responses and mechanical hypersensitivity in healthy volunteers. PERSPECTIVE: This study has demonstrated that exposure to an immersive virtual reality environment can modulate perceptual correlates of endogenous pain modulation and secondary hyperalgesia in a human surrogate pain model. These results suggest that virtual reality could provide a novel mechanism-driven analgesic strategy in patients with altered central pain processing.

Mechanism of aspirin-induced inhibition on the secondary hyperalgesia in osteoarthritis model rats.

AIMS: The daily activity of osteoarthritis (OA) patients is limited by chronic pain and central sensitization. Although non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen are the first-line drugs for the treatment of OA-related pain, their efficacy on central sensitization remains unclear. In the present study, we evaluated the effect of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, Aspirin) using an OA model induced by monosodium iodoacetate (MIA), which has a similar disease progression to human OA. MAIN METHODS: Secondary hyperalgesia was assessed at the plantar surface of the hind paw by Von Frey test. We evaluated the expression of acid-sensing ion channel 3 (ASIC3) in dorsal root ganglia and that of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin-1ß (IL-1ß) in the spinal cord, which may cause secondary hyperalgesia in OA, by immunohistochemical analysis and real-time qPCR. KEY FINDINGS: The administration of ASA attenuated secondary hyperalgesia at 1-3 weeks after MIA, while celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, failed to attenuate secondary hyperalgesia at week 2 after MIA injection, suggesting that ASA exerts its analgesic effect through a COX-2-independent pathway. Immunohistochemical analysis of the dorsal root ganglia indicated that ASA reduced the expression of ASIC3 during OA progression. Expression of TNF-α mRNA, but not IL-1ß mRNA, in the spinal cord following MIA injection was suppressed by ASA administration. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings suggest that ASA may have the ability to attenuate secondary hyperalgesia through suppression of ASIC3 and/or TNF-α expression. ASA is therefore a clinically useful analgesic drug for treatment of secondary hyperalgesia in OA.

Capsaicin-Induced Changes in Electrical Pain Perception Threshold Can Be Used to Assess the Magnitude of Secondary Hyperalgesia in Humans.

OBJECTIVES: Areas of secondary hyperalgesia can be assessed using quantitative sensory testing (QST). Delivering noxious electrocutaneous stimulation could provide added benefit by allowing multiple measurements of the magnitude of hyperalgesia. We aimed to characterize the use of electrical pain perception (EPP) thresholds alongside QST as a means by which to measure changes in pain thresholds within an area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia. METHODS: EPP and heat pain thresholds (HPTs) were measured at five distinct points at baseline and following 1% capsaicin cream application, one within a central zone and four within a secondary zone. Areas of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia were mapped using QST. In a further 14 participants, capsaicin-induced reduction in EPP thresholds was mapped using a radial lines approach across 24 points. RESULTS: There was a reduction in EPP threshold measured at the four points within the secondary zone, which was within the mapped area of mechanical secondary hyperalgesia. The magnitude of secondary hyperalgesia could be split into a mild (∼4% reduction) and severe (∼21% reduction) area within an individual subject. There was no reduction in HPT within the secondary zone, but there was a reduction in both HPT and EPP threshold within the primary zone. EPP mapping revealed differences in the magnitude and spread of hyperalgesia across all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Measuring capsaicin-induced reduction in EPP thresholds can be used to map hyperalgesic areas in humans. This semi-automated approach allows rapid assessment of the magnitude of hyperalgesia, both within an individual subject and across a study population.

The focus of spatial attention during the induction of central sensitization can modulate the subsequent development of secondary hyperalgesia.

Intense or sustained activation of peripheral nociceptors can induce central sensitization. This enhanced responsiveness to nociceptive input of the central nervous system primarily manifests as an increased sensitivity to painful mechanical pinprick stimuli extending beyond the site of injury (secondary mechanical hyperalgesia) and is thought to be a key mechanism in the development of chronic pain, such as persistent post-operative pain. It is increasingly recognized that emotional and cognitive factors can strongly influence the pain experience. Furthermore, through their potential effects on pain modulation circuits including descending pathways to the spinal cord, it has been hypothesized that these emotional and cognitive factors could constitute risk factors for the susceptibility to develop chronic pain. Here, we tested whether, in healthy volunteers, the experimental induction of central sensitization by peripheral nociceptive input can be modulated by selective spatial attention. While participants performed a somatosensory detection task that required focusing attention towards one of the forearms, secondary hyperalgesia was induced at both forearms using bilateral and simultaneous high-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS) of the skin. HFS induced an increased sensitivity to mechanical pinprick stimuli at both forearms, directly (T1) and 20 min (T2) after HFS, confirming the successful induction of secondary hyperalgesia at both forearms. Most importantly, at T2, the HFS-induced increase in pinprick sensitivity as well as the area of secondary hyperalgesia was greater at the attended arm as compared to the non-attended arm. This indicates that top-down attentional factors can modulate the development of central sensitization by peripheral nociceptive input, and that the focus of spatial attention, besides its modulatory effects on perception, can affect activity-dependent neuroplasticity.

Burst-like conditioning electrical stimulation is more efficacious than continuous stimulation for inducing secondary hyperalgesia in humans.

The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of burst-like conditioning electrical stimulation vs. continuous stimulation of cutaneous nociceptors for inducing increased pinprick sensitivity in the surrounding unstimulated skin (a phenomenon referred to as secondary hyperalgesia). In a first experiment (n = 30), we compared the increase in mechanical pinprick sensitivity induced by 50-Hz burst-like stimulation (n = 15) vs. 5-Hz continuous stimulation (n = 15) while maintaining constant the total number of stimuli and the total duration of stimulation. We found a significantly greater increase in mechanical pinprick sensitivity in the surrounding unstimulated skin after 50-Hz burst-like stimulation compared with 5-Hz continuous stimulation (P = 0.013, Cohen's d = 0.970). Importantly, to control for the different frequency of stimulation, we compared in a second experiment (n = 40) 5-Hz continuous stimulation (n = 20) vs. 5-Hz burst-like stimulation (n = 20), this time while keeping the total number of stimuli as well as the frequency of stimulation identical. Again, we found a significantly greater increase in pinprick sensitivity after 5-Hz burst-like stimulation compared with 5-Hz continuous stimulation (P = 0.009, Cohen's d = 0.868). To conclude, our data indicate that burst-like conditioning electrical stimulation is more efficacious than continuous stimulation for inducing secondary hyperalgesia.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Burst-like electrical conditioning stimulation of cutaneous nociceptors is more efficacious than continuous stimulation for inducing heterosynaptic facilitation of mechanical nociceptive input in humans.

A single session of hyperbaric oxygen therapy demonstrates acute and long-lasting neuroplasticity effects in humans: a replicated, randomized controlled clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Animal studies have demonstrated anti-inflammatory, and anti-nociceptive properties of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). However, physiological data are scarce in humans. In a recent experimental study, the authors used the burn injury (BI) model observing a decrease in secondary hyperalgesia areas (SHA) in the HBOT-group compared to a control-group. Surprisingly, a long-lasting neuroplasticity effect mitigating the BI-induced SHA-response was seen in the HBOT-preconditioned group. The objective of the present study, therefore, was to confirm our previous findings using an examiner-blinded, block-randomized, controlled, crossover study design. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Nineteen healthy subjects attended two BI-sessions with an inter-session interval of ≥28 days. The BIs were induced on the lower legs by a contact thermode (12.5 cm2, 47C°, 420 s). The subjects were block-randomized to receive HBOT (2.4 ATA, 100% O2, 90 min) or ambient conditions ([AC]; 1 ATA, 21% O2), dividing cohorts equally into two sequence allocations: HBOT-AC or AC-HBOT. All sensory assessments performed during baseline, BI, and post-intervention phases were at homologous time points irrespective of sequence allocation. The primary outcome was SHA, comparing interventions and sequence allocations. RESULTS: Data are mean (95% CI). During HBOT-sessions a mitigating effect on SHA was demonstrated compared to AC-sessions, ie, 18.8 (10.5-27.0) cm2 vs 32.0 (20.1-43.9) cm2 (P=0.021), respectively. In subjects allocated to the sequence AC-HBOT a significantly larger mean difference in SHA in the AC-session vs the HBOT-session was seen 25.0 (5.4-44.7) cm2 (P=0.019). In subjects allocated to the reverse sequence, HBOT-AC, no difference in SHA between sessions was observed (P=0.55), confirming a preconditioning, long-lasting (≥28 days) effect of HBOT. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that a single HBOT-session compared to control is associated with both acute and long-lasting mitigating effects on BI-induced SHA, confirming central anti-inflammatory, neuroplasticity effects of hyperbaric oxygen therapy.

Heterosynaptic facilitation of mechanical nociceptive input is dependent on the frequency of conditioning stimulation.

High-frequency burstlike electrical conditioning stimulation (HFS) applied to human skin induces an increase in mechanical pinprick sensitivity of the surrounding unconditioned skin (a phenomenon known as secondary hyperalgesia). The present study assessed the effect of frequency of conditioning stimulation on the development of this increased pinprick sensitivity in humans. In a first experiment, we compared the increase in pinprick sensitivity induced by HFS, using monophasic non-charge-compensated pulses and biphasic charge-compensated pulses. High-frequency stimulation, traditionally delivered with non-charge-compensated square-wave pulses, may induce a cumulative depolarization of primary afferents and/or changes in pH at the electrode-tissue interface due to the accumulation of a net residue charge after each pulse. Both could contribute to the development of the increased pinprick sensitivity in a frequency-dependent fashion. We found no significant difference in the increase in pinprick sensitivity between HFS delivered with charge-compensated and non-charge-compensated pulses, indicating that the possible contribution of charge accumulation when non-charge-compensated pulses are used is negligible. In a second experiment, we assessed the effect of different frequencies of conditioning stimulation (5, 20, 42, and 100 Hz) using charge-compensated pulses on the development of increased pinprick sensitivity. The maximal increase in pinprick sensitivity was observed at intermediate frequencies of stimulation (20 and 42 Hz). It is hypothesized that the stronger increase in pinprick sensitivity at intermediate frequencies may be related to the stronger release of substance P and/or neurokinin-1 receptor activation expressed at lamina I neurons after C-fiber stimulation.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Burstlike electrical conditioning stimulation applied to human skin induces an increase in pinprick sensitivity in the surrounding unconditioned skin (a phenomenon referred to as secondary hyperalgesia). Here we show that the development of the increase in pinprick sensitivity is dependent on the frequency of the burstlike electrical conditioning stimulation.

Non-invasive Motor Cortex Neuromodulation Reduces Secondary Hyperalgesia and Enhances Activation of the Descending Pain Modulatory Network.

Central sensitization is a driving mechanism in many chronic pain patients, and manifests as hyperalgesia and allodynia beyond any apparent injury. Recent studies have demonstrated analgesic effects of motor cortex (M1) stimulation in several chronic pain disorders, yet its neural mechanisms remain uncertain. We evaluated whether anodal M1 transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) would mitigate central sensitization as measured by indices of secondary hyperalgesia. We used a capsaicin-heat pain model to elicit secondary mechanical hyperalgesia in 27 healthy subjects. In an assessor and subject-blind randomized, sham-controlled, crossover trial, anodal M1 tDCS decreased the intensity of pinprick hyperalgesia more than cathodal or sham tDCS. To elucidate the mechanism driving analgesia, subjects underwent fMRI of painful mechanical stimuli prior to and following induction of the pain model, after receiving M1 tDCS. We hypothesized that anodal M1 tDCS would enhance engagement of a descending pain modulatory (DPM) network in response to mechanical stimuli. Anodal tDCS normalized the effects of central sensitization on neurophysiological responses to mechanical pain in the medial prefrontal cortex, pregenual anterior cingulate cortex, and periaqueductal gray, important regions in the DPM network. Taken together, these results provide support for the hypothesis that anodal M1-tDCS reduces central sensitization-induced hyperalgesia through the DPM network in humans.

Central sensitization increases the pupil dilation elicited by mechanical pinprick stimulation.

High-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS) of skin nociceptors triggers central sensitization (CS), manifested as increased pinprick sensitivity of the skin surrounding the site of HFS. Our aim was to assess the effect of CS on pinprick-evoked pupil dilation responses (PDRs) and pinprick-evoked brain potentials (PEPs). We hypothesized that the increase in the positive wave of PEPs following HFS would result from an enhanced pinprick-evoked phasic response of the locus coeruleus-noradrenergic system (LC-NS), indicated by enhanced PDRs. In 14 healthy volunteers, 64- and 96-mN pinprick stimuli were delivered to the left and right forearms, before and 20 minutes after HFS was applied to one of the two forearms. Both PEPs and pinprick-evoked PDRs were recorded. After HFS, pinprick stimuli were perceived as more intense at the HFS-treated arm compared with baseline and control site, and this increase was similar for both stimulation intensities. Importantly, the pinprick-evoked PDR was also increased, and the increase was stronger for 64- compared with 96-mN stimulation. This is in line with our previous results showing a stronger increase of the PEP positivity at 64 vs. 96-mN stimulation and suggests that the increase in PEP positivity observed in previous studies could relate, at least in part, to enhanced LC-NS activity. However, there was no increase of the PEP positivity in the present study, indicating that enhanced LC-NS activity is not the only determinant of the HFS-induced enhancement of PEPs. Altogether, our results indicate that PDRs are more sensitive for detecting CS than PEPs. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We provide the first demonstration in humans that activity-dependent central sensitization increases pinprick-evoked autonomic arousal measured by enhanced pupil dilation response.

Brain resting-state connectivity in the development of secondary hyperalgesia in healthy men.

Central sensitization is a condition in which there is an abnormal responsiveness to nociceptive stimuli. As such, the process may contribute to the development and maintenance of pain. Factors influencing the propensity for development of central sensitization have been a subject of intense debate and remain elusive. Injury-induced secondary hyperalgesia can be elicited by experimental pain models in humans, and is believed to be a result of central sensitization. Secondary hyperalgesia may thus reflect the individual level of central sensitization. The objective of this study was to investigate possible associations between increasing size of secondary hyperalgesia area and brain connectivity in known resting-state networks. We recruited 121 healthy participants (male, age 22, SD 3.35) who underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. Prior to the scan session, areas of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization (3 min. 45 °C heat stimulation) were evaluated in all participants. 115 participants were included in the final analysis. We found a positive correlation (increasing connectivity) with increasing area of secondary hyperalgesia in the sensorimotor- and default mode networks. We also observed a negative correlation (decreasing connectivity) with increasing secondary hyperalgesia area in the sensorimotor-, fronto-parietal-, and default mode networks. Our findings indicate that increasing area of secondary hyperalgesia is associated with increasing and decreasing connectivity in multiple networks, suggesting that differences in the propensity for central sensitization, assessed as secondary hyperalgesia areas, may be expressed as differences in the resting-state central neuronal activity.

Central sensitization and pain hypersensitivity: Some critical considerations.

Since its discovery, central sensitization has gained enormous popularity. It is widely used to explain pain hypersensitivity in a wide range of clinical pain conditions. However, at present there is no general consensus on the definition of central sensitization. Moreover, the use of the term central sensitization in the clinical domain has been criticized. The aim of this paper is to foster the discussion on the definition of central sensitization and its use.