Literature DB >> 33767259

An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials.

Iara De Schoenmacker1,2, Carson Berry1, Jean-Sébastien Blouin3, Jan Rosner2,4, Michèle Hubli2, Catherine R Jutzeler1,3,5, John L K Kramer6,7,8.   

Abstract

Previous studies comparing laser (LEPs) and contact heat evoked potentials (CHEPs) consistently reported higher amplitudes following laser compared to contact heat stimulation. However, none of the studies matched the perceived pain intensity, questioning if the observed difference in amplitude is due to biophysical differences between the two methods or a mismatch in stimulation intensity. The aims of the current study were twofold: (1) to directly compare the brain potentials induced by intensity matched laser and contact heat stimulation and (2) investigate how capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia modulates LEPs and CHEPs. Twenty-one healthy subjects were recruited and measured at four experimental sessions: (1) CHEPs + sham, (2) LEPs + sham, (3) CHEPs + capsaicin, and (4) LEPs + capsaicin. Baseline (sham) LEPs latency was significantly shorter and amplitude significantly larger compared to CHEPs, even when matched for perceived pain. Neither CHEPs nor LEPs was sensitive enough to detect secondary hyperalgesia. These differences provide evidence that a faster heating rate results in an earlier and more synchronized LEPs than CHEPs. To our knowledge, this was the first study to match perceived intensity of contact heat and laser stimulations, revealing distinct advantages associated with the acquisition of LEPs.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33767259     DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85819-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  47 in total

1.  Contact heat evoked potentials as a valid means to study nociceptive pathways in human subjects.

Authors:  A C Chen; D M Niddam; L Arendt-Nielsen
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Similar nociceptive afferents mediate psychophysical and electrophysiological responses to heat stimulation of glabrous and hairy skin in humans.

Authors:  G D Iannetti; L Zambreanu; I Tracey
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2006-09-14       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Differences in spinothalamic function of cervical and thoracic dermatomes: insights using contact heat evoked potentials.

Authors:  Jenny S Haefeli; Julia Blum; John D Steeves; John L K Kramer; Armin E P Curt
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.177

4.  Discrepancy between perceived pain and cortical processing: A voxel-based morphometry and contact heat evoked potential study.

Authors:  J L K Kramer; C R Jutzeler; J Haefeli; A Curt; P Freund
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 3.708

Review 5.  Contact heat and cold, mechanical, electrical and chemical stimuli to elicit small fiber-evoked potentials: merits and limitations for basic science and clinical use.

Authors:  U Baumgärtner; W Greffrath; R-D Treede
Journal:  Neurophysiol Clin       Date:  2012-07-28       Impact factor: 3.734

6.  Short-term plastic changes of the human nociceptive system following acute pain induced by capsaicin.

Authors:  Massimiliano Valeriani; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Domenica Le Pera; Domenico Restuccia; Tiziana Rosso; Liala De Armas; Toni Maiese; Antonio Fiaschi; Pietro Tonali; Michele Tinazzi
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.708

7.  Attentional modulation of the nociceptive processing into the human brain: selective spatial attention, probability of stimulus occurrence, and target detection effects on laser evoked potentials.

Authors:  Valéry Legrain; Jean-Michel Guérit; Raymond Bruyer; Léon Plaghki
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.961

8.  Responses of human cutaneous afferents to CO2 laser stimuli causing pain.

Authors:  B Bromm; M T Jahnke; R D Treede
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Functional MRI brain imaging studies using the Contact Heat Evoked Potential Stimulator (CHEPS) in a human volunteer topical capsaicin pain model.

Authors:  Ravikiran Shenoy; Katherine Roberts; Anastasia Papadaki; Donald McRobbie; Maarten Timmers; Theo Meert; Praveen Anand
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 3.133

Review 10.  The search for pain biomarkers in the human brain.

Authors:  André Mouraux; Gian Domenico Iannetti
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 13.501

View more
  2 in total

1.  Experience with opioids does not modify the brain network involved in expectations of placebo analgesia.

Authors:  Corentin A Wicht; Michael Mouthon; Joelle Nsimire Chabwine; Jens Gaab; Lucas Spierer
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 3.698

2.  Improved acquisition of contact heat evoked potentials with increased heating ramp.

Authors:  I De Schoenmacker; J Archibald; J L K Kramer; M Hubli
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.