Stimulation of internal capsule, thalamic sensory nucleus (VPM) and cerebral cortex inhibited deafferentation hyperactivity provoked after gasserian ganglionectomy in cat

Translational aspects of deep brain stimulation for chronic pain

The use of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for the treatment of chronic pain was one of the first applications of this technique in functional neurosurgery. Established brain targets in the clinic include the periaqueductal (PAG)/periventricular gray matter (PVG) and sensory thalamic nuclei. More recently, the anterior cingulum (ACC) and the ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule (VS/ALIC) have been investigated for the treatment of emotional components of pain. In the clinic, most studies showed a response in 20%-70% of patients. In various applications of DBS, animal models either provided the rationale for the development of clinical trials or were utilized as a tool to study potential mechanisms of stimulation responses. Despite the complex nature of pain and the fact that animal models cannot reliably reflect the subjective nature of this condition, multiple preparations have emerged over the years. Overall, DBS was shown to produce an antinociceptive effect in rodents when delivered to targets known to induce analgesic effects in humans, suggesting a good predictive validity. Compared to the relatively high number of clinical trials in the field, however, the number of animal studies has been somewhat limited. Additional investigation using modern neuroscience techniques could unravel the mechanisms and neurocircuitry involved in the analgesic effects of DBS and help to optimize this therapy.

Cortical Regulation of Nociception of the Trigeminal Nucleus Caudalis

Pain perception is strongly influenced by descending pathways from "higher" brain centers that regulate the activity of spinal circuits. In addition to the extensively studied descending system originating from the medulla, the neocortex provides dense anatomical projections that directly target neurons in the spinal cord and the spinal trigeminal nucleus caudalis (SpVc). Evidence exists that these corticotrigeminal pathways may modulate the processing of nociceptive inputs by SpVc, and regulate pain perception. We demonstrate here, with anatomical and optogenetic methods, and using both rats and mice (of both sexes), that corticotrigeminal axons densely innervate SpVc, where they target and directly activate inhibitory and excitatory neurons. Electrophysiological recordings reveal that stimulation of primary somatosensory cortex potently suppresses SpVc responses to noxious stimuli and produces behavioral hypoalgesia. These findings demonstrate that the corticotrigeminal pathway is a potent modulator of nociception and a potential target for interventions to alleviate chronic pain.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Many chronic pain conditions are resistant to conventional therapy. Promising new approaches to pain management capitalize on the brain's own mechanisms for controlling pain perception. Here we demonstrate that cortical neurons directly innervate the brainstem to drive feedforward inhibition of nociceptive neurons. This corticotrigeminal pathway suppresses the activity of these neurons and produces analgesia. This corticotrigeminal pathway may constitute a therapeutic target for chronic pain.

The changes of c-Fos expression by motor cortex stimulation in the deafferentation pain model

The effect of motor cortex stimulation (MCS) therapy for deafferentation pain was evaluated based on c-Fos, a known pain marker. Nineteen mature cats weighing 1.5-3.5 kg were used. Cats were divided into three groups: a deafferentation pain group in which the left trigeminal ganglion was destroyed, an MCS group in which MCS was used following destruction of the trigeminal ganglion, and a control group. Sites and levels of c-Fos expression were examined immunohistochemically. The percentage of c-Fos-positive cells in the left spinal nucleus of the trigeminus, the bilateral insula, and the bilateral operculum increased in both the deafferentation pain and the MCS groups. There were no statistically significant differences between these groups. In the cingulate gyrus, the percentage of c-Fos-positive cells increased bilaterally in the deafferentation pain group and the MCS group, but the increase was greater in the MCS group. The increase in c-Fos-positive cells in the left spinal nucleus of the trigeminus in the deafferentation group may reflect reported electrical hyperactivity. The cingulate gyrus, insula, and parietal operculum were activated after deafferentation. This change (increase in c-Fos positive cells) is related to the development of deafferentation pain. Pain relief due to MCS is not dependent on the suppression of the activated left spinal nucleus of the trigeminus or the descending analgesic mechanism of the brain stem. Activation of the cingulate gyrus appears to be a factor in the analgesic mechanism of MCS.

Invasive and non-invasive brain stimulation for treatment of neuropathic pain in patients with spinal cord injury: a review

CONTEXT

Past evidence has shown that invasive and non-invasive brain stimulation may be effective for relieving central pain.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a topical review of the literature on brain neurostimulation techniques in patients with chronic neuropathic pain due to traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) and to assess the current evidence for their therapeutic efficacy.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search was performed using following terms: "Spinal cord injury", "Neuropathic pain", "Brain stimulation", "Deep brain stimulation" (DBS), "Motor cortex stimulation" (MCS), "Transcranial magnetic stimulation" (TMS), "Transcranial direct current stimulation" (tDCS), "Cranial electrotherapy stimulation" (CES).

RESULTS

Invasive neurostimulation therapies, in particular DBS and epidural MCS, have shown promise as treatments for neuropathic and phantom limb pain. However, the long-term efficacy of DBS is low, while MCS has a relatively higher potential with lesser complications that DBS. Among the non-invasive techniques, there is accumulating evidence that repetitive TMS can produce analgesic effects in healthy subjects undergoing laboratory-induced pain and in chronic pain conditions of various etiologies, at least partially and transiently. Another very safe technique of non-invasive brain stimulation - tDCS - applied over the sensory-motor cortex has been reported to decrease pain sensation and increase pain threshold in healthy subjects. CES has also proved to be effective in managing some types of pain, including neuropathic pain in subjects with SCI.

CONCLUSION

A number of studies have begun to use non-invasive neuromodulatory techniques therapeutically to relieve neuropathic pain and phantom phenomena in patients with SCI. However, further studies are warranted to corroborate the early findings and confirm different targets and stimulation paradigms. The utility of these protocols in combination with pharmacological approaches should also be explored.

Involvement of the periaqueductal gray in the effect of motor cortex stimulation

Several clinical and animal studies of different pain models reported that motor cortex stimulation (MCS) has an antinociceptive effect. In our previous study, the response of the primary somatosensory cortex (SI) to peripheral stimuli decreased after MCS. The aim of the present study was to investigate involvement of the periaqueductal gray (PAG) in this inhibitory effect of MCS. Responses of the SI to electrical stimuli applied to both forepaws of anesthetized rats were monitored to evaluate the effect of MCS. After sensory-evoked potentials (SEPs) were stable, either saline, opioid, or dopamine receptor antagonists were locally microinjected into the PAG. After drug or saline administration, MCS was applied to the forepaw area of the right motor cortex. SEPs after MCS were compared to those before MCS. In the saline group, SEPs ipsilateral to MCS decreased, but SEPs contralateral to MCS did not. The decrease in SEPs was prevented by pretreatment of the PAG with naloxone. Application of a nonspecific dopamine receptor antagonist (α-flupenthixol) to the PAG also blocked the inhibition of SEPs after MCS. Inhibition of SEPs after MCS was blocked by local application of a D1 antagonist (SCH-23390) in the PAG, but not by a D2 antagonist (eticlopride). These results suggest that the PAG participates in the inhibitory effect of MCS, and this effect of MCS may be mediated by opioid and dopamine D1 receptors within thePAG.

Short-term restoration of facial sensory loss by motor cortex stimulation in peripheral post-traumatic neuropathic pain

We report a case in which motor cortex stimulation (MCS) improved neuropathic facial pain due to peripheral nerve injury and restored tactile and thermal sensory loss. A 66-year-old man developed intractable trigeminal neuropathic pain after trauma of the supraorbital branch of the Vth nerve, associated with tactile and thermal sensory loss in the painful area. MCS was performed using neuronavigation and transdural electric stimulation to localize the upper facial area on the motor cortex. One month after surgery, pain was decreased from 80/100 to 20/100 on visual analogic scale, and sensory discrimination improved in the painful area. Two months after surgery, quantitative sensory testing confirmed the normalization of thermal detection thresholds. This case showed that MCS could restore tactile and thermal sensory loss, resulting from peripheral nerve injury. Although the mechanisms leading to this effect remain unclear, this observation enhanced the hypothesis that MCS acts through modulation of the sensory processing.

Chronic precentral stimulation in trigeminal neuropathic pain

The results of Deep Brain Stimulation in deafferentation pain syndromes, in particular in thalamic pain, indicate that excellent long-term pain relief can hardly ever be achieved. We report 7 cases using Motor-Cortex-Stimulation for treating severe trigeminal neuropathic pain syndromes, i.e., dysaesthesia, anaesthesia dolorosa and postherpetic neuralgia. The first implantation of the stimulation device for precentral cerebral stimulation was performed in June 1993, the last in September 1995. In all but one case the impulse-generator was implanted after a successful period of test stimulation. Successful means a pain reduction of more than 50% as assessed with a Visual Analogue Scale. Excluding one case, in whom a prolonged focal seizure resulting in a postictal speech arrest occurred during test stimulation, there have been no operative complications and the postoperative course was uneventful. In all the other patients the pain inhibition appeared below the threshold for producing motor effects. Initially these patients reported a good to excellent pain relief. In three of 6 patients a good to excellent pain control was maintained for a follow-up period of 5 months to 2 years. In the remaining three patients the positive effect decreased over several months.

Motor cortex stimulation as treatment of trigeminal neuropathic pain

A report is given on first experiences with motor cortex stimulation in 10 patients with different forms of neuropathic pain. Three of them had central pain as sequelae of cerebrovascular disease. In none of them did the stimulation provide pain relief. Two patients had pain from peripheral nerve injuries. One did not respond, but the other obtained about 50% pain relief. The remaining 5 patients with trigeminal neuropathy experienced definite pain relief varying between 60 and 90%. During test stimulation most patients had one or two short-lasting generalized seizures. But no one had any motor effects after permanent implantation. Motor cortex stimulation appears to be a new and promising possibility of pain treatment, especially in cases with trigeminal neuropathy, but many problems have yet to be solved, before a clear indication could be given.