Isometric Exercise Combined With Transcranial Electrical Stimulation Improves Conditioned Pain Modulation.

Diffuse noxious inhibitory controls and conditioned pain modulation: a shared neurobiology within the descending pain inhibitory system?

Physically active individuals show greater conditioned pain modulation (CPM) compared with less active individuals. Understanding the effects of acute exercise on CPM may allow for a more targeted use of exercise in the management of pain. This study investigated the effects of acute isometric exercise on CPM. In addition, the between-session and within-session reliability of CPM was investigated. Experimental, randomized crossover study. Laboratory at Marquette University. Thirty healthy adults (19.3±1.5 years, 15 males). Subjects underwent CPM testing before and after isometric exercise (knee extension, 30% maximum voluntary contraction for three minutes) and quiet rest in two separate experimental sessions. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) at the quadriceps and upper trapezius muscles were assessed before, during, and after ice water immersions. PPTs increased during ice water immersion (i.e., CPM), and quadriceps PPT increased after exercise (P < 0.05). CPM decreased similarly following exercise and quiet rest (P > 0.05). CPM within-session reliability was fair to good (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.43-0.70), and the between-session reliability was poor (ICC = 0.20-0.35). Due to the variability in the systemic exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) response, participants were divided into systemic EIH responders (N = 9) and nonresponders (N = 21). EIH responders experienced attenuated CPM following exercise (P = 0.03), whereas the nonresponders showed no significant change (P > 0.05). Isometric exercise decreased CPM in individuals who reported systemic EIH, suggesting activation of shared mechanisms between CPM and systemic EIH responses. These results may improve the understanding of increased pain after exercise in patients with chronic pain and potentially attenuated CPM.

SummaryElectrophysiological studies in humans and animals suggest that noninvasive neurostimulation methods such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can elicit long-lasting [1], polarity-dependent [2] changes in neocortical excitability. Application of tDCS can have significant and selective behavioral consequences that are associated with the cortical location of the stimulation electrodes and the task engaged during stimulation [3–8]. However, the mechanism by which tDCS affects human behavior is unclear. Recently, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been used to determine the spatial topography of tDCS effects [9–13], but no behavioral data were collected during stimulation. The present study is unique in this regard, in that both neural and behavioral responses were recorded using a novel combination of left frontal anodal tDCS during an overt picture-naming fMRI study. We found that tDCS had significant behavioral and regionally specific neural facilitation effects. Furthermore, faster naming responses correlated with decreased blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) signal in Broca's area. Our data support the importance of Broca's area within the normal naming network and as such indicate that Broca's area may be a suitable candidate site for tDCS in neurorehabilitation of anomic patients, whose brain damage spares this region.

Examination of Conditioned Pain Modulation in Myofascial TMD With Consideration of Temporal Summation

Fibromyalgia (FM) patients have dysfunctional endogenous pain modulation, where opioid and serotonergic signaling is implicated. The aim of this study was to investigate whether genetic variants in the genes coding for major structures in the opioid and serotonergic systems can affect pain modulation in FM patients and healthy controls (HC). Conditioned pain modulation (CPM), evaluating the effects of ischemic pain on pressure pain sensitivity, was performed in 82 FM patients and 43 HC. All subjects were genotyped for relevant functional polymorphisms in the genes coding for the μ-opioid receptor (OPRM1, rs1799971), the serotonin transporter (5-HTT, 5-HTTLPR/rs25531) and the serotonin 1a receptor (5-HT1a, rs6295). Results showed the OPRM1 G-allele was associated with decreased CPM. A significant gene-to-gene interaction was found between the OPRM1 and the 5-HT1a gene. Reduced CPM scores were seen particularly in individuals with the OPRM1 G*/5-HT1a CC genotype, indicating that the 5-HT1a CC genotype seems to have an inhibiting effect on CPM if an individual has the OPRM1 G-genotype. Thus, regardless of pain phenotype, the OPRM1 G-allele independently as well as with an interaction with the 5-HT1a gene influenced pain modulation. FM patients had lower CPM than HC but no group differences were found regarding the genetic effects on CPM, indicating that the results reflect more general mechanisms influencing pain modulatory processes rather than underlying the dysfunction of CPM in FM. In conclusion, a genetic variant known to alter the expression of, and binding to, the my-opioid receptor reduced a subject's ability to activate descending pain inhibition. Also, the results suggest a genetically inferred gene-to-gene interaction between the main opioid receptor and a serotonergic structure essential for 5-HT transmission to modulate pain inhibition. The results in this study highlight the importance of studying joint synergistic and antagonistic effects of neurotransmittor systems in regard to pain modulation.

Objectives: This paper aims to determine if hypnotic analgesia suggestion and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) have a differential effect on pain perception. We hypothesized that transcranial direct-current stimulation would be more effective than hypnotic analgesia suggestion at changing the descending pain modulating system, whereas the hypnotic suggestion would have a greater effect in quantitative sensory testing.Design: This is a randomized, double blind and crossover trial.Settings: All stages of this clinical trial were performed at the Laboratory of Pain and Neuromodulation of the Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre.Subjects: Were included 24 healthy females aged from 18 to 45 years old, with a high susceptibility to hypnosis, according to the Waterloo-Stanford Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form C (15).Methods: The subjects received a random and crossover transcranial direct-current stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (2 mA for 20 min) and hypnotic analgesia (20 min).Results: Only hypnotic suggestion produced changes that are statistically significant from pre- to post-intervention in the following outcomes measures: heat pain threshold, heat pain tolerance, cold pressure test, and serum brain-derivate-neurotrophic-factor. The analysis showed a significant main effect for treatment (F = 4.32; P = 0.04) when we compared the delta-(Δ) of conditioned pain modulation task between the transcranial direct-current stimulation and hypnotic suggestion groups. Also, the change in the brain-derivate-neurotrophic-factor was positively correlated with the conditioned pain modulation task.Conclusion: The results confirm a differential effect between hypnotic suggestion and transcranial direct-current stimulation on the pain measures. They suggest that the impact of the interventions has differential neural mechanisms, since the hypnotic suggestion improved pain perception, whereas the transcranial direct-current stimulation increased inhibition of the descending pain modulating system.Clinical Trial Registration:www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03744897.Perspective: These findings highlight the effect of hypnotic suggestion on contra-regulating mechanisms involved in pain perception, while the transcranial direct-current stimulation increased inhibition of the descending pain modulating system. They could help clinicians comprehend the mechanisms involved in hypnotic analgesia and transcranial direct-current stimulation and thus may contribute to pain and disability management.

High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Enhances Conditioned Pain Modulation in Healthy Volunteers: A Randomized Trial

Normal efficiency of exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) has been demonstrated in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA), while recent evidence suggests that EIH may be associated with features of pain sensitization such as abnormal conditioned pain modulation (CPM). The aim of this study was to investigate whether people with knee OA with abnormal CPM have dysfunctional EIH compared with those with normal CPM and pain-free controls. Forty peoples with knee OA were subdivided into groups with abnormal and normal CPM, as determined by a decrease/increase in pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) following the cold pressor test. Abnormal CPM (n=19), normal CPM (n=21), and control participants (n=20) underwent PPT testing before, during, and after aerobic and isometric exercise protocols. Between-group differences were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance and within-group differences were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Significant differences were demonstrated between groups for changes in PPTs postaerobic (F2,55=4.860; P=0.011) and isometric (F2,57=4.727; P=0.013) exercise, with significant decreases in PPTs demonstrated during and postexercise in the abnormal CPM group (P<0.05), and significant increases in PPTs shown during and postexercise in the normal CPM and control groups (P<0.05). Results are suggestive of dysfunctional EIH in response to aerobic and isometric exercise in knee OA patients with abnormal CPM, and normal function of EIH in knee OA patients with an efficient CPM response. Identification of people with knee OA with inefficient endogenous pain modulation may allow for a more individualized and graded approach to exercises in these individuals.

Studies in interictal migraine show either normal or impaired pain modulation, at the psychophysical level. To date, pain modulation in migraineurs has yet to be explored concurrent with imaging methods. We aimed to investigate brain activity associated with endogenous analgesia by functional magnetic resonance imaging in attack-free migraineurs. Thirty-nine episodic migraineurs and 35 controls participated. Endogenous analgesia efficiency was assessed by the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm during functional magnetic resonance imaging. Conditioned pain modulation included 4 stimulation sequences of either test stimulus (noxious contact heat at forearm) given stand alone (Ts_alone) or concomitant to contralateral foot immersion in cold water (Ts_conditioned). The psychophysical CPM (Ts_conditioned minus Ts_alone; 0-10 numerical rating scale) and related brain activity were examined. No group differences were found in the psychophysical CPM (controls: -0.52 ± 0.80; migraineurs: -0.20 ± 0.88; repeated-measures analysis of variance: P = 0.110) or related brain activity (family wise error [P < 0.05] correction at the voxel level). Within groups, controls showed a significant CPM effect (Ts_alone: 6.15 ± 2.03 vs Ts_conditioned: 5.63 ± 1.97; P < 0.001), whereas migraineurs did not (Ts_alone: 5.60 ± 1.92 vs Ts_conditioned: 5.39 ± 2.30; P = 0.153); yet, both groups showed significant CPM-related decreased deactivation in prefrontal areas including the superior frontal gyrus and parietal regions including precuneus. The change in brain activity seems related to task demands rather than to pain reduction. The lack of group difference between migraineurs and controls in CPM and its related brain activity may result from (1) the specific CPM methodology used in this study, since migraineurs are reported to show various pain modulation efficiency for different test paradigms and/or (2) pathophysiological diversity of patients with migraine.

Individual Variation in Pain Sensitivity and Conditioned Pain Modulation in Acute Low Back Pain: Effect of Stimulus Type, Sleep, and Psychological and Lifestyle Factors

Despite extensive research on conditioned pain modulation (CPM), uncertainties remain regarding the role of cognitive mechanisms, such as attentional focus, distraction, and intrinsic a priori expectations, and the most optimal CPM protocol design (parallel vs. sequential). This study examined whether these cognitive factors influence CPM efficacy, and whether CPM magnitude differs between a parallel and sequential protocol. Seventy-two healthy adults participated in this randomised cross-over study undergoing CPM evaluation, that is, pain pressure threshold assessment (=test stimulus) in response to hot water immersion (=conditioning stimulus (CS)) during four experimental protocols, that is, a neutral parallel protocol, a neutral sequential protocol, a sequential protocol with attentional focus on the CS-induced pain intensity, and a sequential protocol with attentional distraction from the CS. Pain expectations were recorded before each protocol. Focusing attention on the CS during CPM assessment resulted in smaller CPM magnitudes compared to no attentional manipulation or distracting from the CS. Distracting from the CS did not affect CPM magnitude compared to no attentional manipulation, nor did a priori expectations. Although CPM magnitudes were not statistically different between the parallel and sequential CPM protocol, a sequential protocol provides higher mean magnitudes and responder rates. Since attentional focus on the CS reduces CPM efficacy, it is recommended to not rate the CS pain intensity during CS application to prevent a reduction of the inhibitory effect. Furthermore, a sequential protocol is recommended over a parallel protocol as a 'cleaner' representation of pain modulation free of attentional sources of biases. Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is an important biomarker reflecting pain processing, however, there is a high variability in CPM response, making it important to gain insight into the influencing factors and mechanisms of CPM. The results of this study suggest that attentional focus on the conditioning stimulus influences CPM magnitude, whereas a distraction task and intrinsic a priori expectations do not. In both therapeutic and preventive approaches, it is of great interest for clinicians to positively address factors influencing CPM. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05161286.

The effect of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation on pain processing in a healthy population: A single-blinded crossover controlled study

BackgroundKnee osteoarthritis (OA) has been the main cause behind chronic pain and disabilities in the elderly population. The traditional treatment for knee OA pain currently concerns a number of combinations of pharmacological and nonpharmacological therapies. However, such combinations have displayed little effects on a significant group of subjects. In addition to this, pharmacological treatments often cause adverse effects, which limits their use on this population. Previous studies showed that chronic knee OA pain may be associated with maladaptive compensatory plasticity in pain-related neural central circuits indexed by a defective descending pain-inhibitory system. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can revert some of these maladaptive changes, thus decreasing chronic pain sensation. Numerous studies have demonstrated that the use of anodal tDCS stimulation over the primary motor cortex (M1) has positive effects on chronic neuropathic pain. Yet, data on OA pain in elderly patients, including its effects on the endogenous pain-inhibitory system, remain limited.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of tDCS in reducing pain intensity caused by knee OA in elderly subjects with defective endogenous pain-inhibitory systems.MethodsWe designed a randomized, sham-controlled, single-center, double-blinded clinical trial. Patients with knee OA who have maintained a chronic pain level during the previous 6 months and report a pain score of 4 or more on a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain in that period will undergo a conditioned pain modulation (CPM) task. Participants who present a reduced CPM response, defined as a decrease in NRS during the CPM task of less than 10%, and meet all of the inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned to receive 15 sessions of 2 mA active or sham tDCS for 20 minutes. A sample size of 94 subjects was calculated. The Brief Pain Inventory pain items will be used to assess pain intensity as our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes will include pain impact on functioning, mobility performance, quality of life, CPM, pressure pain threshold, touch-test sensory evaluation, and safety. Follow-up visits will be performed 2, 4, and 8 weeks following intervention. The data will be analyzed using the principle of intention-to-treat.ResultsThis study was approved by the institutional review board with the protocol number 1685/2016. The enrollment started in April 2018; at the time of publication of this protocol, 25 subjects have been enrolled. We estimate we will complete the enrollment process within 2 years.ConclusionsThis clinical trial will provide relevant data to evaluate if anodal tDCS stimulation over M1 can decrease chronic knee OA pain in elderly subjects with defective CPM. In addition, this trial will advance the investigation of the role of central sensitization in knee OA and evaluate how tDCS stimulation may affect it.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03117231; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03117231 (Archived by WebCite at http://webcitation.org/73WM1LCdJ)International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR1-10.2196/11660

Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is an experimental procedure that consists of an ongoing noxious stimulus attenuating the pain perception caused by another noxious stimulus. A combination of the CPM paradigm with concurrent electrophysiological recordings can establish whether an association exists between experimentally modified pain perception and modulations of neural oscillations. We aimed to characterize how CPM modifies pain perception and underlying neural oscillations. We also interrogated whether these perceptual and/or neurophysiological effects are distinct in patients affected by chronic pain. We presented noxious electrical stimuli to the right ankle before, during, and after CPM induced by an ice pack placed on the left forearm. Seventeen patients with chronic pain and 17 control participants rated the electrical pain in each experimental condition. We used magnetoencephalography to examine the anatomy-specific effects of CPM on the neural oscillatory responses to the electrical pain. Regardless of the participant groups, CPM induced a reduction in subjective pain ratings and neural responses (beta-band [15-35 Hz] oscillations in the sensorimotor cortex) to electrical pain. Our findings of pain-induced beta-band activity may be associated with top-down modulations of pain, as reported in other perceptual modalities. Therefore, the reduced beta-band responses during CPM may indicate changes in top-down pain modulations.

Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is widely used to measure endogenous analgesia, and a recent study indicated that drugs that act on endogenous analgesia are more effective in individuals with lower CPM. Recent animal studies have indicated that pregabalin activates endogenous analgesia by stimulating the descending pain inhibitory system. The present study examined whether the analgesic effect of pregabalin is greater in individuals with lower original endogenous analgesia using CPM. Fifty-nine healthy subjects were randomly assigned to either a pregabalin group or a placebo group, and 50 of them completed the study. CPM was measured before and after pregabalin or placebo administration. The correlation of initial CPM to change in CPM was compared between the pregabalin and placebo groups. Initial CPM was significantly correlated with the change in CPM in the pregabalin group (r=-0.73, p<0.0001) but not in the placebo group (p=0.56) (difference in correlation coefficients between groups; p=0.004). Furthermore, the initial CPM significantly affected the change in CPM in the pregabalin group but not in the placebo group (pregabalin group: adj R2 =0.51, p<0.001, y=-0.54x+2.98; placebo group: p=0.56, significant difference in regression slopes; p=0.015). These results indicate that pregabalin has a higher endogenous analgesic effect in individuals with lower original endogenous analgesia. The analgesic effect of pregabalin depends on the original endogenous analgesia status. Its effect on conditioned pain modulation (CPM) was stronger for subjects with lower original endogenous analgesia, suggesting that the mechanism of pregabalin involves the improvement of endogenous analgesia.