I. Évaluation de la douleur aiguë chez l’animal d’expérience. Première partie

Abstract

Objective: To describe tests of nociception which appear in the “pre-clinical” literature. Data sources: References obtained by computerized bibliographic research (Medline®) and the authors' personal data. Data synthesis: Ethical problems arising from the study of the pain in awake animals, problems arising from the choice of stimulus and stimulus parameters and the quantification of responses are presented. Pain in animals can be estimated only by examining their reactions, but at the same time, the existence of a reaction does not necessarily mean that there is a concomitant sensation. A description of the signs of pain in mammals is proposed. A noxious stimulus can be defined by its physical nature, its site of application and what has previously happened to the tissues at this site. Electrical stimulation short-circuits the process of transduction at free nerve endings and is not specific ; however it has the advantage that it can be applied suddenly and briefly and thus results in synchronised signals in the relevant primary afferent fibres which can be differentiated into Aδ and C fibres. Heat selectively stimulates thermoreceptors and nociceptors, but the low calorific power of conventional stimulators restricts their usefulness. Radiant sources have the disadvantage of emitting waves in the visible and the adjacent infrared spectra, for which the skin is a poor absorber and good reflector. Thermodes have the disadvantage of activating mechanoreceptors and thermoreceptors simultaneously ; furthermore, their capacity for transferring heat depends on the quality of contact with skin and thus on the pressure with which they are applied. These problems can be overcome by using CO 2 lasers but even today, the cost of these is a major disadvantage. Chemical stimuli differ from those mentioned above by the progressive onset of their effectiveness, their duration of action and the fact that they are of an inescapable nature. Experimental models employing chemical stimuli are undoubtedly the most similar to acute clinical pain. A wide spectrum of reactions are observed in nociceptive tests, but in almost every case they involve motor responses. After defining the ideal characteristics of a nociceptive test, tests based on the use of short duration and longer duration stimuli are presented. In tests of phasic pain, reactions are evoked by thermal (tail-flick test, hot-plate test), mechanical or electrical (flinch-jump test, vocalisation test) stimuli. Tests of tonic pain employ injections of algogenic agents intradermally (formalin test) or intraperitoneally (writhing test) or even the dilation of hollow organs. All these tests will be critically appraised in a subsequent paper 〚1〛. Conclusion: The tail-flick and hot-plate tests are the most used, but there is an increasing recourse to the formalin test and tests involving foot withdrawal after mechanical stimulation.