BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Quantitative sensory testing (QST) has proven to be an important instrument to characterize mechanisms underlying somatic and neuropathic pain disorders. However, its reliability has not previously been established in patients with visceral pain. We investigated the test-retest reliability of static and dynamic QST in patients with visceral pain due to chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Sixty-two patients (38 men, 53 [11] y) with painful chronic pancreatitis were included. Static QST comprised sensory thresholds for pressure and electrical stimulation performed in the ventral and dorsal T10 dermatomes (sharing spinal innervation with the pancreas, ie, pancreatic viscerotomes) and in 4 heterologous regions (control areas). Dynamic QST comprised conditioned pain modulation. Measurements were obtained from 2 subsequent test sessions separated by 1 week. RESULTS: The reliability of static QST was generally high, with the best test-retest performance seen for pressure pain thresholds (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC], 0.74) and electrical sensation thresholds (ICC, 0.66). In contrast, the reliability of dynamic QST was poor (ICC, 0.01). For static QST measures, the reliability was higher for pain thresholds compared with suprapain thresholds (P < 0.01). No differences between assessments in the pancreatic viscerotomes compared with heterologous regions were seen (P = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Sensory thresholds in the pancreatic viscerotomes and control areas were reproducible over time. In contrast, dynamic QST measurements reflecting active central modulation of pain processing state (ie, conditioned pain modulation) were not stable over time and showed considerable variability. These factors should be taken into consideration in case QST is used to follow disease mechanisms, drug effects, or effects of pain intervention.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Quantitative sensory testing (QST) has proven to be an important instrument to characterize mechanisms underlying somatic and neuropathic pain disorders. However, its reliability has not previously been established in patients with visceral pain. We investigated the test-retest reliability of static and dynamic QST in patients with visceral pain due to chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Sixty-two patients (38 men, 53 [11] y) with painful chronic pancreatitis were included. Static QST comprised sensory thresholds for pressure and electrical stimulation performed in the ventral and dorsal T10 dermatomes (sharing spinal innervation with the pancreas, ie, pancreatic viscerotomes) and in 4 heterologous regions (control areas). Dynamic QST comprised conditioned pain modulation. Measurements were obtained from 2 subsequent test sessions separated by 1 week. RESULTS: The reliability of static QST was generally high, with the best test-retest performance seen for pressure pain thresholds (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC], 0.74) and electrical sensation thresholds (ICC, 0.66). In contrast, the reliability of dynamic QST was poor (ICC, 0.01). For static QST measures, the reliability was higher for pain thresholds compared with suprapain thresholds (P < 0.01). No differences between assessments in the pancreatic viscerotomes compared with heterologous regions were seen (P = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Sensory thresholds in the pancreatic viscerotomes and control areas were reproducible over time. In contrast, dynamic QST measurements reflecting active central modulation of pain processing state (ie, conditioned pain modulation) were not stable over time and showed considerable variability. These factors should be taken into consideration in case QST is used to follow disease mechanisms, drug effects, or effects of pain intervention.
Authors: Martin J De Vita; Stephen A Maisto; Emily B Ansell; Emily L Zale; Joseph W Ditre Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Stefan A W Bouwense; Marjan de Vries; Luuk T W Schreuder; Søren S Olesen; Jens B Frøkjær; Asbjørn M Drewes; Harry van Goor; Oliver H G Wilder-Smith Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-01-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Stefan Aw Bouwense; Søren S Olesen; Asbjørn M Drewes; Harry van Goor; Oliver Hg Wilder-Smith Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2015-07-10 Impact factor: 3.133
Authors: José A Biurrun Manresa; Raphael Fritsche; Pascal H Vuilleumier; Carmen Oehler; Carsten D Mørch; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Ole K Andersen; Michele Curatolo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Asbjørn M Drewes; Anne E Olesen; Adam D Farmer; Eva Szigethy; Vinciane Rebours; Søren S Olesen Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Søren S Olesen; Carina Graversen; Stefan A W Bouwense; Harry van Goor; Oliver H G Wilder-Smith; Asbjørn M Drewes Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Stefan A W Bouwense; Søren S Olesen; Asbjørn M Drewes; Jens B Frøkjær; Harry van Goor; Oliver H G Wilder-Smith Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240