Quantitative and qualitative assessment of sensory changes induced by local anesthetics block of two different trigeminal nerve branches

Beyond numbers: integrating qualitative analysis into quantitative sensory testing for neuropathic pain

This article investigates the benefits of adopting qualitative and quantitative sensory testing (QQST) in sensory assessment, with a focus on understanding neuropathic pain. The innovative QQST method combines participant qualitative experiences with quantitative psychophysical measurements, offering a more varied interpretation of sensory abnormalities and normal sensory function. This article also explores the steps for the optimization of the method by identifying qualitative signs of sensory abnormalities and standardizing data collection. By leveraging the inherent subjectivity in the test design and participant responses, the QQST method contributes to a more holistic exploration of both normal and abnormal sensory experiences. This article positions the QQST approach as a foundational element within the Sensory Evaluation Network, uniting international experts to harmonize qualitative and quantitative sensory evaluation methods.

Facilitatory Effect of Intermittent Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Perceptual Distortion of the Face

Orofacial pain patients often report that the painful facial area is "swollen" without clinical signs - known as perceptual distortion (PD). The neuromodulatory effect of facilitatory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on PD in healthy individuals was investigated, to provide further support that the primary somatosensory cortex (SI) is involved in facial PD. Participants were allocated to active (n = 26) or sham (n = 26) rTMS group in this case-control study. PD was induced experimentally by injecting local anesthesia (LA) in the right infraorbital region. PD was measured at baseline, 6 min after LA, immediately, 20 and 40 min after rTMS. Intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) as active rTMS and sham rTMS was applied to the face representation area of SI at 10 min after LA. The magnitude of PD was compared between the groups. The magnitude of PD significantly increased immediately after iTBS compared with sham rTMS (P = .009). The PD was significantly higher immediately after iTBS compared to 6 min after LA (P = .004) in the active rTMS group, but not in the sham rTMS group (P = .054). iTBS applied to a somatotopic-relevant cortical region appears to facilitate facial PD further supporting the involvement of SI in the processing of one´s own face and PD. PERSPECTIVE: This study provides information on neural substrate responsible for processing of perceptual distortion of the face which is speculated to contribute to the chronification of orofacial pain. The findings of this study may aid in mechanism-based management of the condition in orofacial pain disorders and possibly other chronic pain states.

Classification of Qualitative Fieldnotes Collected During Quantitative Sensory Testing: A Step Towards the Development of a New Mixed Methods Approach in Pain Research

PURPOSE

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a standardized method to assess somatosensory function. The collection of qualitative information, during the QST procedure, could be an interesting way to facilitate the characterization of altered sensory perception and the identification of different pain phenotypes. The aims of this study were 1) to classify qualitative fieldnotes of sensory abnormalities collected during an independent QST study, and 2) to generate a qualitative interview guide that could be included in the traditional QST procedure as a step towards the implementation of a mixed methods approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

QST data were collected from 48 chronic neuropathic pain patients treated with spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Three body areas, with or without SCS, were tested: the painful limb targeted by SCS, the contralateral area, and the ipsilateral upper limb. After each trial of each QST modality, patients were encouraged to report any sensory abnormalities they could identify with a pain quality scale or using their own words.

RESULTS

Qualitative self-reported sensory abnormalities were dichotomized into two groups: altered sensory intensities and altered sensory perceptions. Altered sensory intensities were classified as sensory loss or sensory gain subgroups. Altered sensory perceptions were classified as paresthesia and dysesthesia subgroups Overall, 630 qualitative fieldnotes of altered sensations were collected: 385 on the painful limb, 173 at the contralateral area, and 72 at the ipsilateral upper limb. Based on these qualitative data, we propose a standardized method to collect qualitative data involving 9 open- and close-ended questions and 21 codes.

CONCLUSION

Our findings have highlighted the value of qualitative sensory evaluation during QST and constitute an important milestone in the development of a mixed methods protocol in phenotyping research.

Psychophysical evaluation of somatosensory function in oro-facial pain: achievements and challenges

AIM

This critical review describes key methodological aspects for a successful oro-facial psychophysical evaluation of the somatosensory system and highlights the diagnostic value of somatosensory assessment and management perspectives based on somatosensory profiling.

METHODS

This topical review was based on a non-systematic search for studies about somatosensory evaluation in oro-facial pain in PubMed and Embase.

RESULTS

The recent progress regarding the psychophysical evaluation of somatosensory function was largely possible due to the development and application of valid, reliable and standardised psychophysical methods. Qualitative sensory testing may be useful as a screening tool to rule out relevant somatosensory abnormalities. Nevertheless, the patient should preferably be referred to a more comprehensive assessment with the quantitative sensory testing battery if confirmation of somatosensory abnormalities is necessary. Moreover, the identification of relevant somatosensory alterations in chronic pain disorders that do not fulfil the current criteria to be regarded as neuropathic has also increased the usefulness of somatosensory evaluation as a feasible method to better characterise the patients and perhaps elucidate some underpinnings of the so-called 'nociplastic' pain disorders. Finally, an additional benefit of oro-facial pain treatment based on somatosensory profiling still needs to be demonstrated and convincing evidence of somatosensory findings as predictors of treatment efficacy in chronic oro-facial pain awaits further studies.

CONCLUSION

Psychophysical evaluation of somatosensory function in oro-facial pain is still in its infancy but with a clear potential to continue to improve the assessment, diagnosis and management of oro-facial pain patients.

Sensory Perception in Lumbosacral Radiculopathy with Radicular Pain: Feasibility Study of Multimodal Bedside-Suitable Somatosensory Testing

Background

Somatosensory testing could be useful in stratifying pain patients and improving pain treatment guidelines. Bedside-suitable techniques are searched for application in daily clinical practice. This study aimed to characterize chronic unilateral lumbosacral radiculopathy (LSR) patients with radicular pain using multimodal bedside-suitable somatosensory testing.

Materials and methods

We evaluated 50 chronic unilateral LSR patients with radicular pain (LSR group) and 24 controls (Control group). Sensory testing was performed using a battery of bedside sensory tests (10g monofilament, 200–400 mN brush, Lindblom rollers with controlled 25°C and 40°C temperature, and 40g neurological pin and investigator’s finger pressure). Participants had to rate their sensory perceptions on both legs at multiple test points within L3 to S2 dermatomes. Characteristics of the testing process and sensory disturbances were analyzed.

Results

LSR group showed sensory disturbances in 82% of patients. The Control group showed no sensory disturbances. Sensory testing took longer (p < 0.001) in the LSR group (29.3 ± 6.5 minutes per patient) than in the Control group (20.5 ± 5.2). Nine sensory phenotypes were detected in the LSR group according to individual sensory disturbances within 5 superficial tests.

Conclusions

The applied multimodal bedside-suitable somatosensory testing battery is suitable for sensory evaluation and characterization of LSR patients. Grouping of allied sensory phenotypes revealed some tendencies in pain intensity characteristics.

Qualitative Sensory Testing in Outcome Prediction of Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection for Chronic Painful Unilateral Lumbosacral Radiculopathy: Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is widely practiced for the treatment of radicular pain. As its effectiveness is still subject to debate, a better patient selection for TFESI is necessary. We aimed to evaluate the potential of bedside-suitable qualitative sensory testing (QualST) to determine the early effectiveness of TFESI for the treatment of chronic lumbosacral radiculopathy (LSR)-related pain.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients with chronic painful unilateral LSR were evaluated in a prospective observational study using five standardized sensory tests (10 g monofilament, 200 to 400 mN brush, Lindblom rollers with controlled 25 and 40°C temperature, and 40 g neurological pin). Quality of sensory perceptions on the painful leg was compared to the non-painful leg and rated as normal sensitivity, hyposensitivity, or hypersensitivity. Pain and related characteristics were evaluated before TFESI, 1 week after and 4 weeks after intervention.

RESULTS

Seven sensory phenotypes were distinguished according to individual sets of sensory disturbances acquired with five sensory tests. Patients were grouped into four groups of allied phenotypes (normal sensitivity, hyposensitivity to 1 to 3 modalities, hyposensitivity to 4 to 5 modalities, and hypersensitivity). The whole study group showed significant improvement in most parameters of outcome measurements. Statistical analysis revealed some significant differences between sensory groups in patient-reported treatment effect scales after 4 weeks. We also detected significant differences between sensory groups in repeated measures after 1 and 4 weeks in some pain intensity characteristics and patient-reported treatment effect scales.

CONCLUSION

QualST might be clinically applicable for detecting patient subgroups that could differ in the early treatment results of radicular pain by TFESI.

Pain complications of oral implants: Is that an issue?

The use of oral implants as a form of replacing missing teeth in partial or total edentulous patients is considered the gold standard in oral rehabilitation. Although considered a history of success in contemporary dentistry, surgical complications may occur, as excessive bleeding, damage to the adjacent teeth and mandibular fractures. Persistent pain and abnormal somatosensory responses after the surgery ordinary healing time are also potential problems and may lead to the development of a condition named posttraumatic trigeminal neuropathic pain (PTNP). Though relatively rare, PTNP has a profound impact on patient's quality of life. Appropriated previous image techniques, effective anaesthetic procedures and caution during the surgical procedure and implant installation are recommended for the prevention of this condition. In case of the PTNP, different management modalities, including antidepressant and membrane stabilizer medications, as well as peripheral strategies, as the use of topical medication and the botulin toxin are presented and discussed.

Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Orofacial quantitative sensory testing (QST) is an increasingly valuable psychophysical tool for evaluating neurosensory disorders of the orofacial region. Here, we aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding this testing method and to discuss its future clinical potential.

DATA TREATMENT

We conducted a literature search in Medline, Embase and Scopus for English-language articles published between 1990 and 2019. The utilized search terms included QST, quantitative, sensory testing and neurosensory, which were combined using the AND operator with the terms facial, orofacial, trigeminal, intraoral and oral.

RESULTS

Our findings highlighted many methods for conducting QST-including method of levels, method of limits and mapping. Potential stimuli also vary, and can include mechanical or thermal stimulation, vibration or pinprick stimuli. Orofacial QST may be helpful in revealing disease pathways and can be used for patient stratification to validate the use of neurosensory profile-specific treatment options. QST is reportedly reliable in longitudinal studies and is thus a candidate for measuring changes over time. One disadvantage of QST is the substantial time required; however, further methodological refinements and the combination of partial aspects of the full QST battery with other tests and imaging methods should result in improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, orofacial QST is a reliable testing method for diagnosing pathological neurosensory conditions and assessing normal neurosensory function. Despite the remaining challenges that hinder the use of QST for everyday clinical decisions and clinical trials, we expect that future improvements will allow its implementation in routine practice.

The Effect of Granisetron on Sensory Detection and Pain Thresholds in Facial Skin of Healthy Young Males

Background: The specific serotonin type 3 (5-HT₃)-receptor antagonist granisetron effectively reduces clinical as well as experimental muscle pain and hyperalgesia and with a duration that exceeds that of lidocaine. Hence, it may be an alternative to lidocaine as a local anesthetic. There are also some indications that granisetron in addition to 5-HT₃ receptors blocks sodium channels. Thus, the local anesthetic effect by granisetron may resemble that of lidocaine, but this has not been tested. The aim of this study was therefore to compare the effect granisetron has on facial skin sensitivity to the effect of lidocaine and isotonic saline.

Methods: This was a randomized, controlled, and double-blind study, in which 1 ml of either granisetron (test-substance), lidocaine (positive control), or isotonic saline (negative control) was injected into the skin over the masseter muscle at three different occasions in 18 healthy males (27.2 ± 5.8 years old). Skin detection thresholds and pain thresholds for thermal stimuli as well as mechanical detection thresholds and sensitivity to a painful mechanical (pinprick) stimulus were assessed before (baseline) and 5, 20, 40, and 60 min after injection. The quality and area of subjective sensory change over the cheek were assessed 20 min after injection.

Results: All substances increased the mechanical detection threshold (granisetron: p = 0.011; lidocaine: p = 0.016; saline: p = 0.031). Both granisetron and lidocaine, but not isotonic saline, increased the heat detection thresholds (p < 0.001 and p < 0.02, respectively), but not the cold detection thresholds. Granisetron and lidocaine also reduced pinprick pain (p = 0.001 for each comparison). There were no significant differences between granisetron and lidocaine for any of these variables. There was no effect on thermal pain thresholds for any substance.

Conclusion: The similar analgesic patterns on mechanical sensory and pain thresholds as well as thermal sensory thresholds over the facial skin by subcutaneous injection of granisetron and lidocaine shown in this study and the absence of paresthesia, in combination with the reduced pain intensity and pressure pain sensitivity shown in previous studies, indicate that granisetron might be a novel candidate as a local anesthetic.