Early cortical activities evoked by noxious stimulation in humans

Evidence-based source modeling of nociceptive cortical responses: A direct comparison of scalp and intracranial activity in humans

BACKGROUND

Source modeling of EEG traditionally relies on interplay between physiological hypotheses and mathematical estimates. We propose to optimize the process by using evidence gathered from brain imaging and intracortical recordings.

METHODS

We recorded laser-evoked potentials in 18 healthy participants, using high-density EEG. Brain sources were modeled during the first second poststimulus, constraining their initial position to regions where nociceptive-related activity has been ascertained by intracranial EEG. These comprised the two posterior operculo-insular regions, primary sensorimotor, posterior parietal, anterior cingulate/supplementary motor (ACC/SMA), bilateral frontal/anterior insular, and posterior cingulate (PCC) cortices.

RESULTS

The model yielded an average goodness of fit of 91% for individual and 95.8% for grand-average data. When compared with intracranial recordings from 27 human subjects, no significant difference in peak latencies was observed between modeled and intracranial data for 5 of the 6 assessable regions. Morphological match was excellent for operculo-insular, frontal, ACC/SMA and PCC regions (cross-correlation > 0.7) and fair for sensori-motor and posterior parietal cortex (c-c ∼ 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple overlapping activities evoked by nociceptive input can be disentangled from high-density scalp EEG guided by intracranial data. Modeled sources accurately described the timing and morphology of most activities recorded with intracranial electrodes, including those coinciding with the emergence of stimulus awareness. Hum Brain Mapp 38:6083-6095, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Unmasking the obligatory components of nociceptive event-related brain potentials

It has been hypothesized that the human cortical responses to nociceptive and nonnociceptive somatosensory inputs differ. Supporting this view, somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEPs) elicited by thermal nociceptive stimuli have been suggested to originate from areas 1 and 2 of the contralateral primary somatosensory (S1), operculo-insular, and cingulate cortices, whereas the early components of nonnociceptive SEPs mainly originate from area 3b of S1. However, to avoid producing a burn lesion, and sensitize or fatigue nociceptors, thermonociceptive SEPs are typically obtained by delivering a small number of stimuli with a large and variable interstimulus interval (ISI). In contrast, the early components of nonnociceptive SEPs are usually obtained by applying many stimuli at a rapid rate. Hence, previously reported differences between nociceptive and nonnociceptive SEPs could be due to differences in signal-to-noise ratio and/or differences in the contribution of cognitive processes related, for example, to arousal and attention. Here, using intraepidermal electrical stimulation to selectively activate Aδ-nociceptors at a fast and constant 1-s ISI, we found that the nociceptive SEPs obtained with a long ISI are no longer identified, indicating that these responses are not obligatory for nociception. Furthermore, using a blind source separation, we found that, unlike the obligatory components of nonnociceptive SEPs, the obligatory components of nociceptive SEPs do not receive a significant contribution from a contralateral source possibly originating from S1. Instead, they were best explained by sources compatible with bilateral operculo-insular and/or cingulate locations. Taken together, our results indicate that the obligatory components of nociceptive and nonnociceptive SEPs are fundamentally different.

Increased brain responses during subjectively-matched mechanical pain stimulation in fibromyalgia patients as evidenced by MEG

OBJECTIVE

The precise pathophysiology of fibromyalgia, a syndrome characterized by chronic widespread pain, remains to be clarified. When subjected to the same amount of stimulation, patients show enhanced brain responses as compared to controls, providing evidence of central pain augmentation in this syndrome. We aimed to characterize brain response differences when stimulation is adjusted to elicit similar subjective levels of pain in both groups.

METHODS

Magnetoencephalography (MEG) was used to investigate the brain responses to pressure stimulation applied both above and below the pain threshold in nine patients and nine control subjects. A device was developed to deliver pressure pulses in a quantifiable and precise manner. The amount of pressure was adjusted to produce similar subjective pain in both groups.

RESULTS

A between-group comparison of differences between responses evoked by stimulation above and below the pain threshold was performed using cluster-based permutation testing. Increases in signal amplitude in somatosensory, temporal and parietal areas at short latencies, and in prefrontal areas at both short and long latencies, were found to be larger for patients than for control subjects.

CONCLUSION

Fibromyalgia patients show enhanced brain responses after reducing the amount of pressure to produce similar subjective levels of pain than to the control subjects.

SIGNIFICANCE

The present results suggest that central pain augmentation is present in fibromyalgia, not only when the objective level of stimulation is kept the same as for control subjects, but also when stimulation is adjusted to produce similar levels of pain in patients and controls.

Dipole source analyses of laser evoked potentials obtained from subdural grid recordings from primary somatic sensory cortex

The cortical potentials evoked by cutaneous application of a laser stimulus (laser evoked potentials, LEP) often include potentials in the primary somatic sensory cortex (S1), which may be located within the subdivisions of S1 including Brodmann areas 3A, 3B, 1, and 2. The precise location of the LEP generator may clarify the pattern of activation of human S1 by painful stimuli. We now test the hypothesis that the generators of the LEP are located in human Brodmann area 1 or 3A within S1. Local field potential (LFP) source analysis of the LEP was obtained from subdural grids over sensorimotor cortex in two patients undergoing epilepsy surgery. The relationship of LEP dipoles was compared with dipoles for somatic sensory potentials evoked by median nerve stimulation (SEP) and recorded in area 3B (see Baumgärtner U, Vogel H, Ohara S, Treede RD, Lenz FA. J Neurophysiol 104: 3029-3041, 2010). Both patients had an early radial dipole in S1. The LEP dipole was located medial, anterior, and deep to the SEP dipole, which suggests a nociceptive dipole in area 3A. One patient had a later tangential dipole with positivity posterior, which is opposite to the orientation of the SEP dipole in area 3B. The reversal of orientations between modalities is consistent with the cortical surface negative orientation resulting from superficial termination of thalamocortical neurons that receive inputs from the spinothalamic tract. Therefore, the present results suggest that the LEP may result in a radial dipole consistent with a generator in area 3A and a putative later tangential generator in area 3B.