AIMS: To compare results from analysis of averaged and single-sweep evoked brain potentials (EPs) by visual inspection and spectral analysis in order to identify an objective measure for the analgesic effect of buprenorphine and fentanyl. METHODS:Twenty-two healthy males were included in a randomized study to assess the changes in EPs after 110 sweeps of painful electrical stimulation to the median nerve following treatment with buprenorphine, fentanyl or placebo patches. Bone pressure, cutaneous heat and electrical pain ratings were assessed. EPs and pain assessments were obtained before drug administration, 24, 48, 72 and 144 h after beginning of treatment. Features from EPs were extracted by three different approaches: (i) visual inspection of amplitude and latency of the main peaks in the average EPs, (ii) spectral distribution of the average EPs and (iii) spectral distribution of the EPs from single-sweeps. RESULTS:Visual inspection revealed no difference between active treatments and placebo (all P > 0.05). Spectral distribution of the averaged potentials showed a decrease in the beta (12-32 Hz) band for fentanyl (P = 0.036), which however did not correlate with pain ratings. Spectral distribution in the single-sweep EPs revealed significant increases in the theta, alpha and beta bands for buprenorphine (all P < 0.05) as well as theta band increase for fentanyl (P = 0.05). For buprenorphine, beta band activity correlated with bone pressure and cutaneous heat pain (both P = 0.04, r = 0.90). CONCLUSION: In conclusion single-sweep spectral band analysis increases the information on the response of the brain to opioids and may be used to identify the response to analgesics.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To compare results from analysis of averaged and single-sweep evoked brain potentials (EPs) by visual inspection and spectral analysis in order to identify an objective measure for the analgesic effect of buprenorphine and fentanyl. METHODS: Twenty-two healthy males were included in a randomized study to assess the changes in EPs after 110 sweeps of painful electrical stimulation to the median nerve following treatment with buprenorphine, fentanyl or placebo patches. Bone pressure, cutaneous heat and electrical pain ratings were assessed. EPs and pain assessments were obtained before drug administration, 24, 48, 72 and 144 h after beginning of treatment. Features from EPs were extracted by three different approaches: (i) visual inspection of amplitude and latency of the main peaks in the average EPs, (ii) spectral distribution of the average EPs and (iii) spectral distribution of the EPs from single-sweeps. RESULTS: Visual inspection revealed no difference between active treatments and placebo (all P > 0.05). Spectral distribution of the averaged potentials showed a decrease in the beta (12-32 Hz) band for fentanyl (P = 0.036), which however did not correlate with pain ratings. Spectral distribution in the single-sweep EPs revealed significant increases in the theta, alpha and beta bands for buprenorphine (all P < 0.05) as well as theta band increase for fentanyl (P = 0.05). For buprenorphine, beta band activity correlated with bone pressure and cutaneous heat pain (both P = 0.04, r = 0.90). CONCLUSION: In conclusion single-sweep spectral band analysis increases the information on the response of the brain to opioids and may be used to identify the response to analgesics.
Authors: Trine Andresen; Richard N Upton; David J R Foster; Lona L Christrup; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Asbjørn M Drewes Journal: Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol Date: 2010-12-08 Impact factor: 4.080
Authors: Gunter N Schmidt; Eckehard Scharein; Markus Siegel; Jakob Müller; Stefan Debener; Rainer Nitzschke; Andreas Engel; Petra Bischoff Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Gregory P Boivin; Debra L Hickman; Michelle A Creamer-Hente; Kathleen R Pritchett-Corning; Natalie A Bratcher Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 1.232
Authors: Keith G Phillips; Rolf-Detlef Treede; André Mouraux; Petra Bloms-Funke; Irmgard Boesl; Ombretta Caspani; Sonya C Chapman; Giulia Di Stefano; Nanna Brix Finnerup; Luis Garcia-Larrea; Marcus Goetz; Anna Kostenko; Bernhard Pelz; Esther Pogatzki-Zahn; Karin Schubart; Alexandre Stouffs; Andrea Truini; Irene Tracey; Iñaki F Troconiz; Johannes Van Niel; Jose Miguel Vela; Katy Vincent; Jan Vollert; Vishvarani Wanigasekera; Matthias Wittayer Journal: Trials Date: 2021-06-17 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Eulália Silva dos Santos Pinheiro; Fernanda Costa de Queirós; Pedro Montoya; Cleber Luz Santos; Marion Alves do Nascimento; Clara Hikari Ito; Manuela Silva; David Barros Nunes Santos; Silvia Benevides; José Garcia Vivas Miranda; Katia Nunes Sá; Abrahão Fontes Baptista Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lisa Goudman; Jorne Laton; Raf Brouns; Guy Nagels; Eva Huysmans; Ronald Buyl; Kelly Ickmans; Jo Nijs; Maarten Moens Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2017-11-15 Impact factor: 3.133