Age does not affect sex effect of conditioned pain modulation of pressure and thermal pain across 2 conditioning stimuli

Sex differences in conditioned pain modulation effects and its associations with autonomic nervous system activities in healthy, younger individuals: a pilot study

Introduction

Sex differences in conditioned pain modulation (CPM) have not been sufficiently explored.

Objectives

This pilot study aimed to examine sex differences in CPM effects and associations between autonomic activities and CPM effects in healthy, younger individuals.

Methods

University students were recruited from February to March 2021 and divided by sex. They remained seated for 10 minutes as a rest period, then immersed their right hands in cold water for 2 minutes as a cold period. The pressure pain threshold (PPT) was measured after each period, presenting the CPM index (%) using the formula: (PPTcold/PPTrest) × 100. Autonomic nervous system variables were calculated using the formula-(autonomic variablecold/autonomic variablerest) × 100-and suffixed by "index" such as low-frequency/high-frequency (LF/HF) index. Some psychological questionnaires were self-recorded. Sex differences in the CPM index were statistically compared, and a simple linear regression analysis between the CPM and autonomic indices was conducted.

Results

Thirty-two participants were analyzed (14 women and 18 men; aged 21.1 ± 0.6 and 20.9 ± 0.3 years, respectively). Conditioned pain modulation effects were not different at 127.0 ± 19.1% in women and 124.0 ± 18.7% in men. The LF/HF index, LF normalized unit (nu) index (LFnu), and HFnu index had significant predictor variables for the CPM index across overall samples. The LF/HF index and LFnu index were significant predictor variables for the CPM index for women but not for men.

Conclusions

Conditioned pain modulation effects between groups seem to be similar. The LF/HF and LFnu indices in women were significant, indicating that descending pain modulations in women might be more associated with autonomic activities than those in men.

Body-site effect on CPM efficiency in healthy subjects: Central vs. peripheral stimulation

Structural changes in the peripheral nerve system in neuropathic states alter sensory capacity of the affected area, thus biasing results of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) responses. The aim of this study was to evaluate CPM efficiency of central (i.e. trunk) vs. peripheral (i.e. limb) application of 'test' and 'conditioning' stimuli. Methods: Healthy volunteers (ages 18-73 yrs) underwent two CPM protocols: 'CPM Limb' and 'CPM Trunk'. Each included two types of test stimuli (Ts) (pressure pain threshold: PPT; and contact heat) conditioned either to hand immersion in cold noxious water (CPM limb), or to noxious contact heat applied on lower back (CPM trunk). Results: Both protocols generated efficient pain inhibition for each of the applied Ts; the PPT-based protocol induced more efficient CPM when the conditioned stimulus was applied on the trunk (p = 0.016). Moreover, the PPT-based CPM responses were significantly correlated (ρ = 0.349; p = 0.007). Conclusions: An efficient CPM induced by both central and peripheral stimulation, along with significant correlation between PPT-based responses, advances using the central 'CPM Trunk' protocol in patients with peripheral neuropathy.

Prolonged continuous theta burst stimulation increases motor corticospinal excitability and intracortical inhibition in patients with neuropathic pain: An exploratory, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

A new paradigm for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), referred to as prolonged continuous theta burst stimulation (pcTBS), has recently received attention in the literature because of its advantages over high frequency repetitive TMS (HF-rTMS). Clinical advantages include less time per intervention session and the effects appear to be more robust and reproducible than HF-rTMS to modulate cortical excitability. HF-rTMS targeted at the primary motor cortex (M1) has demonstrated analgesic effects in patients with neuropathic pain but their mechanisms of action are unclear and pcTBS has been studied in healthy subjects only. This study examined the neural mechanisms that have been proposed to play a role in explaining the effects of pcTBS targeted at the M1 and DLPFC brain regions in neuropathic pain (NP) patients with Type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Forty-two patients with painful diabetic neuropathy were randomized to receive a single session of pcTBS targeted at the left M1 or left DLPFC. pcTBS stimulation consisted of 1,200 pulses delivered in 1 min and 44 s with a 35-45 min gap between sham and active pcTBS stimulation. Both the activity of the descending pain system which was examined using conditioned pain modulation and the activity of the ascending pain system which was assessed using temporal summation of pain were recorded using a handheld pressure algometer by measuring pressure pain thresholds. The amplitude of the motor evoked potential (MEP) was used to measure motor corticospinal excitability and GABA activity was assessed using short (SICI) and long intracortical inhibition (LICI). All these measurements were performed at baseline and post-pcTBS stimulation.

RESULTS

Following a single session of pcTBS targeted at M1 and DLPFC, there was no change in BPI-DN scores and on the activity of the descending (measured using conditioned pain modulation) and ascending pain systems (measured using temporal summation of pain) compared to baseline but there was a significant improvement of >13% in perception of acute pain intensity, increased motor corticospinal excitability (measured using MEP amplitude) and intracortical inhibition (measured using SICI and LICI).

CONCLUSION

In patients with NP, a single session of pcTBS targeted at the M1 and DLPFC modulated the neurophysiological mechanisms related to motor corticospinal excitability and neurochemical mechanisms linked to GABA activity, but it did not modulate the activity of the ascending and descending endogenous modulatory systems. In addition, although BPI-DN scores did not change, there was a 13% improvement in self-reported perception of acute pain intensity.

Temple cooling increases parasympathetic activity and decreases pressure pain on the hand

BACKGROUND

Applying an ice cube to the temple (the conditioning stimulus) inhibits electrically evoked pain in the forearm. The present study aimed to determine whether temple cooling also inhibits pressure- and heat-pain test stimuli in the upper limb and, if so, to investigate the intra-session test-retest reliability of this response. Additional aims were to establish whether pain inhibition evoked by temple cooling was associated with parasympathetic activity; and to explore sex differences in response.

METHODS

The sample consisted of 40 healthy adults (24 females). Heart rate was recorded continuously throughout the session. An ice cube (3 × 4 cm contact area) was applied for 1 min to the temple on the dominant side. Before and immediately afterwards, the pressure pain threshold was measured from the dorsal hand and sensitivity to heat (individually adjusted at baseline to elicit moderate pain) was measured from the ventral forearm. The procedures were repeated 15 min later.

RESULTS

Temple cooling inhibited pressure pain on the hand but not heat pain on the forearm. However, test-retest reliability of pressure pain inhibition was poor. Heart rate decreased during temple cooling, consistent with a "diving" reflex. Males had stronger pressure pain inhibition, lower heart rate and higher overall autonomic activity than females. However, cardiac parasympathetic activation during temple cooling was comparable in both sexes and was unrelated to pain inhibition.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that temple cooling evokes pain inhibition that is stronger in males than in females. Cardiac parasympathetic activity does not appear to mediate this response.

SIGNIFICANCE

The conditioning stimulus in the conditioned pain modulation paradigm is often applied to the upper or lower limbs. This may confound pain-inhibitory effects in people with peripheral neuropathy who typically have enhanced or diminished sensation in the extremities. Applying an ice cube at the temple area induces pain-inhibitory effects on the upper limb after the ice is removed. Future research examining pain modulation in people with peripheral neuropathy may consider adopting temple cooling as the conditioning stimulus.

Sex-related differences in experimental pain sensitivity in subjects with painful or painless neuropathy after surgical repair of traumatic nerve injuries

Higher pain intensities at all experimental stimuli but a tendency to faster recovery after cold conditioning stimuli were seen in women with neuropathy in comparison with men.

Introduction:

Sex-related influences represent a contributor to greater pain sensitivity and have a higher prevalence of many chronic pain conditions, including neuropathic pain (NP), among women.

Objectives:

The aim was to analyze how differences in ongoing pain, experimental pain intensity, and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) relate to sex in subjects with neuropathy after traumatic nerve injuries.

Methods:

Endogenous pain modulation was compared between male (n = 77) and female (n = 55) subjects and between subjects with NP (female = 31, male = 39) and pain-free subjects with posttraumatic neuropathy (female = 24, male = 38). Conditioned pain modulation was assessed by pain ratings to pressure stimuli before and after a noxious conditioning stimulus (CS) conducted with one arm submerged in cold water (4°C) for 1 minute. Time of recovery (Time off) of pain intensity from peak VAS_maxc after CS was recorded and compared between male and female patients.

Results:

Greater ongoing pain intensity was found among female patients compared with male patients and more experimental pain after pressure and cold induced pain. Summing all groups together, women had 0.8 times higher odds (20%) of recovering sooner than men after CS (95% CI = 0.65–2.9). No differences in CPM, time off, and psychosocial variables were seen between female and male patients (P < 0.05).

Conclusion:

Our hypothesis for sex differences in endogenous pain modulation was only supported by a shorter after-sensation time after cold CS in female patients. No sex differences in the magnitude of CPM effect were identified. Increased pain intensity for experimental pain, in both neuropathic pain and neuropathy without pain, was found in female patients.

Not just sensitization: sympathetic mechanisms contribute to expand experimental referred pain

Background

Widespread pain partially depends upon sensitization of central pain mechanisms. However, mechanisms controlling pain distribution are not completely known. The present study sought to assess skin temperature variations in the area of experimentally-induced pain and potential sex differences.

Methods

Pressure-pain thresholds (PPTs) were measured on the right infraspinatus muscle. At the end of Day 0, all participants performed an eccentric exercise of the shoulder external rotators to induce muscle soreness 24 hours after. On Day 1, participants indicated on a body chart the area of pain induced by 60 seconds of suprathreshold pressure stimulation (STPS; PPT + 20%) on the right infraspinatus muscle. Skin temperature variations in the area of referred pain were recorded with an infrared thermography camera, immediately before and after the STPS.

Results

Twenty healthy, pain-free individuals (10 females) participated. On Day 0, the pre-STPS temperature was higher than the post-STPS temperature on the arm (P = 0.001) and forearm (P = 0.003). On Day 1, the pre-STPS temperature was higher than the post-STPS temperature on the shoulder (P = 0.015), arm (P = 0.001), and forearm (P = 0.010). On Day 0, the temperature decrease after STPS in females was greater than in males on the forearm (P = 0.039). On Day 1, a greater temperature decrease was found amongst females compared with males at the shoulder (P = 0.018), arm (P = 0.046), and forearm (P = 0.005).

Conclusions

These findings indicate that sympathetic vasomotor responses contribute to expand pressure-induced referred pain, especially among females.

The Potential Clinical Utility of Pressure-Based vs. Heat-Based Paradigms to Measure Conditioned Pain Modulation in Healthy Individuals and Those With Chronic Pain

Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is a physiological measure thought to reflect an individual's endogenous pain modulation system. CPM varies across individuals and provides insight into chronic pain pathophysiology. There is growing evidence that CPM may help predict individual pain treatment outcome. However, paradigm variabilities and practical issues have impeded widespread clinical adoption of CPM assessment. This study aimed to compare two CPM paradigms in people with chronic pain and healthy individuals. A total of 30 individuals (12 chronic pain, 18 healthy) underwent two CPM paradigms. The heat CPM paradigm acquired pain intensity ratings evoked by a test stimulus (TS) applied before and during the conditioning stimulus (CS). The pressure CPM paradigm acquired continuous pain intensity ratings of a gradually increasing TS, before and during CS. Pain intensity was rated from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst pain imaginable); Pain50 is the stimulus level for a response rated 50. Heat and pressure CPM were calculated as a change in TS pain intensity ratings at Pain50, where negative CPM scores indicate pain inhibition. We also determined CPM in the pressure paradigm as change in pressure pain detection threshold (PDT). We found that in healthy individuals the CPM effect was significantly more inhibitory using the pressure paradigm than the heat paradigm. The pressure CPM effect was also significantly more inhibitory when based on changes at Pain50 than at PDT. However, in individuals with chronic pain there was no significant difference in pressure CPM compared to heat or PDT CPM. There was no significant correlation between clinical pain measures (painDETECT and Brief Pain Inventory) and paradigm type (heat vs. pressure), although heat-based CPM and painDETECT scores showed a trend. Importantly, the pressure paradigm could be administered in less time than the heat paradigm. Thus, our study indicates that in healthy individuals, interpretation of CPM findings should consider potential modality-dependent effects. However, in individuals with chronic pain, either heat or pressure paradigms can similarly be used to assess CPM. Given the practical advantages of the pressure paradigm (e.g., short test time, ease of use), we propose this approach to be well-suited for clinical adoption.

Advancing our understanding of neuropathic pain in diabetes mellitus using conditioned pain modulation: further considerations for age and testing site

ABSTRACT

Neuropathy is common among individuals with diabetes mellitus, and is associated with decreased quality of life, greater comorbidity, and substantial economic burden. However, the mechanisms underlying painful diabetic polyneuropathy has yet to be fully elucidated. While it is recognized that diabetic polyneuropathy places patients at a greater risk for developing neuropathic pain, it is still not clear why some individuals develop pain and others do not. Similar to other chronic pain conditions, painful diabetic neuropathy is likely driven by alterations in both the peripheral and central nervous system. Experimental conditioned pain modulation paradigms have contributed substantially to our current understanding of chronic pain across various disease states. In a new study, researchers have extended this work by examining the efficiency of conditioned pain modulation in patients with painful and non-painful diabetic polyneuropathy. Surprisingly, the results indicate individuals with painful neuropathy experience greater endogenous pain inhibition, which may seem counterintuitive at first blush. Here, we discuss potential explanations and directions for future research, including consideration for age effects, testing site, and disease type, with the goal of further advancing this important line of research.

Test-retest reliability of pressure pain threshold and heat pain threshold as test stimuli for evaluation of conditioned pain modulation

OBJECTIVES

There is growing interest in conditioned pain modulation (CPM) protocols for evaluating the function of the descending pain-modulatory system in clinical settings. The aim of this study was to evaluate test-retest reliability of a CPM protocol with contact heat as a conditioning stimulus (CS) and two test stimuli (pressure pain threshold (PPT) and heat pain threshold (HPT)), all applied within one session. In addition, gender and age differences were evaluated.

METHODS

The study included 87 healthy subjects (average age 37.95 ± 12.02 years, 57.5% females). The magnitude of the results of the CPM test was calculated as the difference between subject-reported pain thresholds before and after application of the CS. To assess the reliability of the protocol, a subgroup of 66 subjects underwent re-test after 14±1 days. In order to investigate the influence of age on the CPM magnitude, subjects were divided into subgroups (20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59 years).

RESULTS

The pain thresholds for both test stimuli (TS) were significantly higher following the application of the CS (p < 0.001). Values of the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the CPM with PPT as the TS indicated good reliability (ICC=0.631, 95% CI:0.365-0.782), while those for the HPT indicated poor reliability (ICC=0.328, 95% CI:-0.067-0.582). Significant differences in CPM between genders were found for both TS. Significant CPM differences were not detected among the four age subgroups for either TS.

CONCLUSIONS

CPM effects can be successfully induced with both PPT and HPT as a TS, but PPT showed significantly higher reliability.

A psychophysical study comparing massage to conditioned pain modulation: A single blind randomized controlled trial in healthy participants

INTRODUCTION

Pain-inducing massage results in greater pain inhibition than pain free massage, suggesting a mechanism dependent on conditioned pain modulation (CPM). The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that pain inducing massage produces similar magnitude of reduction in pain sensitivity as a cold pressor task and that baseline conditioned pain modulation efficiency predicts pain inducing massage related hypoalgesia.

METHODS

Sixty healthy participants were randomly assigned to receive either pain inducing massage to the neck, cold pressor task to the hand, or pain free massage to the neck. Participants also underwent pre and immediate post-intervention quantitative sensory testing. A repeated measures ANCOVA determined between group differences in pain sensitivity changes.

RESULTS

Pain inducing massage used as a conditioning stimulus resulted in comparable experimental pain sensitivity changes as a cold pressor task (p > 0.05). Pain intensity during the intervention demonstrated a weak correlation (r = 0.20, p = 0.12) with changes in pain sensitivity at a remote site. Individuals with an efficient CPM at baseline who received the pain inducing massage displayed greater increases in pressure pain threshold compared to individuals with a less efficient CPM indicating the potential benefit of treatment stratification by mechanism.

CONCLUSION

Although pain inducing massage resulted in less self-reported pain than a cold pressor task, both resulted in similar magnitude of the CPM response, suggesting shared underlying mechanisms. Understanding mechanisms of interventions can move us closer to mechanistic based treatments for pain which is consistent with a personalized medicine approach to care.