J-Y Hong1,2,3, B Naliboff1,2,4,5, J S Labus1,2,4,5, A Gupta1,2, L A Kilpatrick1,2,4, C Ashe-McNalley1,2,4, J Stains1,2, N Heendeniya1,2, S R Smith1,2, K Tillisch1,2,4, E A Mayer1,2,4,5,6,7. 1. Oppenheimer Center for Neurobiology of Stress, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 3. Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Pain and Interoception Imaging Network (PAIN), University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. Brain Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 6. Department of Psychiatry, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 7. Ahmanson Lovelace Brain Mapping Center, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A majority of the subjects with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) show increased behavioral and brain responses to expected and delivered aversive visceral stimuli during controlled rectal balloon distension, and during palpation of the sigmoid colon. We aimed to determine if altered brain responses to cued and uncued pain expectation are also seen in the context of a noxious somatic pain stimulus applied to the same dermatome as the sigmoid colon. METHODS: A task-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging technique was used to investigate the brain activity of 37 healthy controls (18 females) and 37 IBS subjects (21 females) during: (i) a cued expectation of an electric shock to the abdomen vs a cued safe condition; and (ii) an uncued cross-hair condition in which the threat is primarily based on context vs a cued safe condition. KEY RESULTS: Regions within the salience, attention, default mode, and emotional arousal networks were more activated by the cued abdominal threat condition and the uncued condition than in the cued safe condition. During the uncued condition contrasted to the cued safe condition, IBS subjects (compared to healthy control subjects) showed greater brain activations in the affective (amygdala, anterior insula) and attentional (middle frontal gyrus) regions, and in the thalamus and precuneus. These disease-related differences were primarily seen in female subjects. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: The observed greater engagement of cognitive and emotional brain networks in IBS subjects during contextual threat may reflect the propensity of IBS subjects to overestimate the likelihood and severity of future abdominal pain.
BACKGROUND: A majority of the subjects with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) show increased behavioral and brain responses to expected and delivered aversive visceral stimuli during controlled rectal balloon distension, and during palpation of the sigmoid colon. We aimed to determine if altered brain responses to cued and uncued pain expectation are also seen in the context of a noxious somatic pain stimulus applied to the same dermatome as the sigmoid colon. METHODS: A task-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging technique was used to investigate the brain activity of 37 healthy controls (18 females) and 37 IBS subjects (21 females) during: (i) a cued expectation of an electric shock to the abdomen vs a cued safe condition; and (ii) an uncued cross-hair condition in which the threat is primarily based on context vs a cued safe condition. KEY RESULTS: Regions within the salience, attention, default mode, and emotional arousal networks were more activated by the cued abdominal threat condition and the uncued condition than in the cued safe condition. During the uncued condition contrasted to the cued safe condition, IBS subjects (compared to healthy control subjects) showed greater brain activations in the affective (amygdala, anterior insula) and attentional (middle frontal gyrus) regions, and in the thalamus and precuneus. These disease-related differences were primarily seen in female subjects. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: The observed greater engagement of cognitive and emotional brain networks in IBS subjects during contextual threat may reflect the propensity of IBS subjects to overestimate the likelihood and severity of future abdominal pain.
Authors: John R Keltner; Ansgar Furst; Catherine Fan; Rick Redfern; Ben Inglis; Howard L Fields Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2006-04-19 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Mats B O Larsson; Kirsten Tillisch; A D Craig; Maria Engström; Jennifer Labus; Bruce Naliboff; Peter Lundberg; Magnus Ström; Emeran A Mayer; Susanna A Walter Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2011-11-19 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Steven M Berman; Bruce D Naliboff; Brandall Suyenobu; Jennifer S Labus; Jean Stains; Joshua A Bueller; Kim Ruby; Emeran A Mayer Journal: Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol Date: 2006-04-13 Impact factor: 3.619
Authors: Thomas Straube; Stephanie Schmidt; Thomas Weiss; Hans-Joachim Mentzel; Wolfgang H R Miltner Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Jaime S Ide; Simon Zhornitsky; Herta H Chao; Sheng Zhang; Sien Hu; Wuyi Wang; John H Krystal; Chiang-Shan R Li Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2018-05-03
Authors: Paul T Heitmann; Paul F Vollebregt; Charles H Knowles; Peter J Lunniss; Phil G Dinning; S Mark Scott Journal: Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2021-08-09 Impact factor: 46.802
Authors: Catherine S Hubbard; Lino Becerra; Nicole Heinz; Allison Ludwick; Tali Rasooly; Rina Wu; Adriana Johnson; Neil L Schechter; David Borsook; Samuel Nurko Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 3.240