The Area of Secondary Hyperalgesia following Heat Stimulation in Healthy Male Volunteers: Inter- and Intra-Individual Variance and Reproducibility

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Non-pharmacological Methods to Manipulate Experimentally Induced Secondary Hypersensitivity

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effects of non-pharmacological manipulations on experimentally induced secondary hypersensitivity in pain-free humans. We investigated the magnitude (change/difference in follow-up ratings from pre-manipulation ratings) of secondary hypersensitivity (primary outcome), and surface area of secondary hypersensitivity (secondary outcome), in 27 studies representing 847 participants. Risk of bias assessment concluded most studies (23 of 27) had an unclear or high risk of performance and detection bias. Further, 2 (of 27) studies had a high risk of measurement bias. Datasets were pooled by the method of manipulation and outcome. The magnitude of secondary hypersensitivity was decreased by diverting attention, anodal transcranial direct current stimulation, or emotional disclosure; increased by directing attention toward the induction site, nicotine deprivation, or negative suggestion; and unaffected by cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation or thermal change. Area of secondary hypersensitivity was decreased by anodal transcranial direct current stimulation, emotional disclosure, cognitive behavioral therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, placebo analgesia, or spinal manipulation; increased by directing attention to the induction site, nicotine deprivation, or sleep disruption (in males only); and unaffected by cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation, thermal change, acupuncture, or electroacupuncture. Meta-analytical pooling was only appropriate for studies that used transcranial direct current stimulation or hyperbaric oxygen therapy, given the high clinical heterogeneity among the studies and unavailability of data. The evidence base for this question remains small. We discuss opportunities to improve methodological rigor including manipulation checks, structured blinding strategies, control conditions or time points, and public sharing of raw data. PERSPECTIVE: We described the effects of several non-pharmacological manipulations on experimentally induced secondary hypersensitivity in humans. By shedding light on the potential for non-pharmacological therapies to influence secondary hypersensitivity, it provides a foundation for the development and testing of targeted therapies for secondary hypersensitivity.

Chronic temporomandibular disorders are associated with higher propensity to develop central sensitization: a case-control study

ABSTRACT

Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) include a group of musculoskeletal disorders that may involve increased responsiveness of nociceptive neurons in the central nervous system (ie, central sensitization). To test this hypothesis further, this study examined whether, as compared with healthy subjects, patients with chronic TMD have a greater propensity to develop secondary mechanical hyperalgesia-a phenomenon that can be confidently attributed to central sensitization. In this case-control study, we assessed the area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia induced experimentally by delivering high-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS) to the volar forearm skin in 20 participants with chronic TMD and 20 matched healthy controls. High-frequency electrical stimulation consisted in 12 trains of constant-current electrical pulses (5 mA) delivered at 42 Hz. The area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia was evaluated 30 minutes after applying HFS. The area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia induced by HFS was on average 76% larger in the chronic TMD group (M = 67.7 cm 2 , SD = 28.2) than in the healthy control group (M = 38.4 cm 2 , SD = 14.9; P = 0.0003). Regarding secondary outcomes, there was no group difference in the intensity of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia, but allodynia to cotton after HFS was more frequent in the chronic TMD group. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to show that individuals with chronic TMD have an increased propensity to develop secondary hyperalgesia in a site innervated extratrigeminally. Our results contribute to a better understanding of the pathophysiology of chronic TMD.

During capsaicin-induced central sensitization, brush allodynia is associated with baseline warmth sensitivity, whereas mechanical hyperalgesia is associated with painful mechanical sensibility, anxiety and somatization

BACKGROUND

Mechanical hyperalgesia and allodynia incidence varies considerably amongst neuropathic pain patients. This study explored whether sensory or psychological factors associate with mechanical hyperalgesia and brush allodynia in a human experimental model.

METHODS

Sixty-six healthy volunteers (29 male) completed psychological questionnaires and participated in two quantitative sensory testing (QST) sessions. Warmth detection threshold (WDT), heat pain threshold (HPT) and suprathreshold mechanical pain (STMP) ratings were measured before exposure to a capsaicin-heat pain model (C-HP). After C-HP exposure, brush allodynia and STMP were measured in one session, whilst mechanical hyperalgesia was measured in another session.

RESULTS

WDT and HPT measured in sessions separated by 1 month demonstrated significant but moderate levels of reliability (WDT: ICC = 0.5, 95%CI [0.28, 0.77]; HPT: ICC = 0.62, 95%CI [0.40, 0.77]). Brush allodynia associated with lower WDT (z = -3.06, p = 0.002; ϕ = 0.27). Those with allodynia showed greater hyperalgesia intensity (F = 7.044, p = 0.010, η_p ²  = 0.107) and area (F = 9.319, p = 0.004, η_p ²  = 0.163) than those without allodynia. No psychological self-report measures were significantly different between allodynic and nonallodynic groups. Intensity of hyperalgesia in response to lighter mechanical stimuli was associated with lower HPT, higher STMP ratings and higher Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire scores at baseline. Hyperalgesia to heavier probe stimuli associated with state anxiety and to a lesser extent somatic awareness. Hyperalgesic area associated with lower baseline HPT and higher STMP ratings. Hyperalgesic area was not correlated with allodynic area across individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support research in neuropathic pain patients and human experimental models that peripheral sensory input and individual sensibility are related to development of mechanical allodynia and hyperalgesia during central sensitization, whilst psychological factors play a lesser role.

SIGNIFICANCE

We evaluated differential relationships of psychological and perceptual sensitivity to the development of capsaicin-induced mechanical allodynia and hyperalgesia. Fifty percent of healthy volunteers failed to develop mechanical allodynia. Baseline pain sensitivity was greater in those developing allodynia and was related to the magnitude and area of hyperalgesia. State psychological factors, whilst unrelated to allodynia, were related to mechanical hyperalgesia. This supports that the intensity of peripheral sensory input and individual sensibility are related to development of mechanical allodynia and hyperalgesia during central sensitization, whilst psychological factors play a lesser role.

Human surrogate models of central sensitization: A critical review and practical guide

Background

As in other fields of medicine, development of new medications for management of neuropathic pain has been difficult since preclinical rodent models do not necessarily translate to the clinics. Aside from ongoing pain with burning or shock‐like qualities, neuropathic pain is often characterized by pain hypersensitivity (hyperalgesia and allodynia), most often towards mechanical stimuli, reflecting sensitization of neural transmission.

Data treatment

We therefore performed a systematic literature review (PubMed‐Medline, Cochrane, WoS, ClinicalTrials) and semi‐quantitative meta‐analysis of human pain models that aim to induce central sensitization, and generate hyperalgesia surrounding a real or simulated injury.

Results

From an initial set of 1569 reports, we identified and analysed 269 studies using more than a dozen human models of sensitization. Five of these models (intradermal or topical capsaicin, low‐ or high‐frequency electrical stimulation, thermode‐induced heat‐injury) were found to reliably induce secondary hyperalgesia to pinprick and have been implemented in multiple laboratories. The ability of these models to induce dynamic mechanical allodynia was however substantially lower. The proportion of subjects who developed hypersensitivity was rarely provided, giving rise to significant reporting bias. In four of these models pharmacological profiles allowed to verify similarity to some clinical conditions, and therefore may inform basic research for new drug development.

Conclusions

While there is no single “optimal” model of central sensitization, the range of validated and easy‐to‐use procedures in humans should be able to inform preclinical researchers on helpful potential biomarkers, thereby narrowing the translation gap between basic and clinical data.

Significance

Being able to mimic aspects of pathological pain directly in humans has a huge potential to understand pathophysiology and provide animal research with translatable biomarkers for drug development. One group of human surrogate models has proven to have excellent predictive validity: they respond to clinically active medications and do not respond to clinically inactive medications, including some that worked in animals but failed in the clinics. They should therefore inform basic research for new drug development.

The Effect of Low-Level Light Therapy on Capsaicin-Induced Peripheral and Central Sensitization in Healthy Volunteers: A Double-Blinded, Randomized, Sham-Controlled Trial

Introduction

Several clinical trials have demonstrated that low-level light therapy (LLLT), a method of photobiomodulation, is an effective analgetic treatment. However, the mechanism of action has not yet been finally clarified. In particular, unanswered questions include whether it only affects peripheral or whether it also affects the spinal or supraspinal level. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of low-level light therapy on primary and secondary hyperalgesia in a human pain model.

Methods

This study was planned as a randomized, sham-controlled, and double-blinded trial with repeated measures within subject design. Capsaicin was applied on both forearms of ten healthy volunteers to induce peripheral and central sensitization. One forearm was treated with low-level light therapy; the other served as sham control.

Results

Low-level light therapy significantly increased the mechanical pain threshold, heat pain threshold, and decreased pain intensity.

Conclusions

Our data indicate that low-level light therapy is effective at reducing the heat and mechanical pain threshold in a human pain model, pointing to a significant modulating effect on peripheral and central sensitization. These effects—especially in the absence of reported side effects—make low-level light therapy a promising tool in pain management. The application of low-level light therapy to treat chronic pain should be considered for further clinical trials.

Within- and between-session reliability of secondary hyperalgesia induced by electrical high-frequency stimulation

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of studies are focusing on secondary hyperalgesia to better understand central sensitization, as this phenomenon may play an important role in persistent pain. Recent studies have shown that, compared to the classical high-frequency stimulation protocol (HFS) at 100 Hz, a protocol using 42 Hz stimulation induces a more intense and a larger area of secondary hyperalgesia (SH).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the within- and between-session reliability of SH induced by this optimized HFS protocol.

METHODS

Thirty-two healthy subjects received HFS to their volar forearm in two sessions, separated by at least 2 weeks. SH was assessed by measuring the area size of increased sensitivity to pinprick stimuli after applying HFS, the sensitivity to pinprick stimuli after applying HFS and the change in pinprick sensitivity after versus before HFS. Assessments were made before HFS, and 30, 35 and 40 min after HFS. Relative and absolute reliability were analysed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), coefficients of variation (CVs), standard error of means (SEMs) and the minimum detectable changes (MDCs).

RESULTS

The area of SH showed good to excellent within-session and between-session relative reliability (ICCs > 0.80), except for the change in pinprick sensitivity, which showed close to poor between-session relative reliability (ICC = 0.53). Furthermore, measures of absolute reliability generally demonstrated large between-subject variability and significant fluctuations across repeated measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

HFS-induced hyperalgesia is suitable to discriminate or compare individuals but it may not be sensitive to changes due to an intervention.

SIGNIFICANCE

It is crucial to evaluate central sensitization adequately in humans. This study formally establishes the reliability of secondary hyperalgesia induced by electrical high-frequency stimulation. The results of this study will improve future studies investigating secondary hyperalgesia in humans.

Brain resting-state connectivity in the development of secondary hyperalgesia in healthy men

Central sensitization is a condition in which there is an abnormal responsiveness to nociceptive stimuli. As such, the process may contribute to the development and maintenance of pain. Factors influencing the propensity for development of central sensitization have been a subject of intense debate and remain elusive. Injury-induced secondary hyperalgesia can be elicited by experimental pain models in humans, and is believed to be a result of central sensitization. Secondary hyperalgesia may thus reflect the individual level of central sensitization. The objective of this study was to investigate possible associations between increasing size of secondary hyperalgesia area and brain connectivity in known resting-state networks. We recruited 121 healthy participants (male, age 22, SD 3.35) who underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. Prior to the scan session, areas of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization (3 min. 45 °C heat stimulation) were evaluated in all participants. 115 participants were included in the final analysis. We found a positive correlation (increasing connectivity) with increasing area of secondary hyperalgesia in the sensorimotor- and default mode networks. We also observed a negative correlation (decreasing connectivity) with increasing secondary hyperalgesia area in the sensorimotor-, fronto-parietal-, and default mode networks. Our findings indicate that increasing area of secondary hyperalgesia is associated with increasing and decreasing connectivity in multiple networks, suggesting that differences in the propensity for central sensitization, assessed as secondary hyperalgesia areas, may be expressed as differences in the resting-state central neuronal activity.

The association between areas of secondary hyperalgesia and volumes of the caudate nuclei and other pain relevant brain structures-A 3-tesla MRI study of healthy men

Introduction

Central sensitization plays a pivotal role in maintenance of pain and is believed to be intricately involved in several chronic pain conditions. One clinical manifestation of central sensitization is secondary hyperalgesia. The degree of secondary hyperalgesia presumably reflects individual levels of central sensitization. The objective of this study was to investigate the association between areas of secondary hyperalgesia and volumes of the caudate nuclei and other brain structures involved in pain processing.

Materials and methods

We recruited 121 healthy male participants; 118 were included in the final analysis. All participants underwent whole brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Prior to MRI, all participants underwent pain testing. Secondary hyperalgesia was induced by brief thermal sensitization. Additionally, we recorded heat pain detection thresholds (HPDT), pain during one minute thermal stimulation (p-TS) and results of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression score (HADS).

Results

We found no significant associations between the size of the area of secondary hyperalgesia and the volume of the caudate nuclei or of the following structures: primary somatosensory cortex, anterior and mid cingulate cortex, putamen, nucleus accumbens, globus pallidus, insula and the cerebellum. Likewise, we found no significant associations between the volume of the caudate nuclei and HPDTs, p-TS, PCS and HADS.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that the size of the secondary hyperalgesia area is not associated with the volume of brain structures relevant for pain processing, suggesting that the propensity to develop central sensitization, assessed as secondary hyperalgesia, is not correlated to brain structure volume.

Heat pain detection threshold is associated with the area of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization: a study of healthy male volunteers

Introduction

The area of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization (BTS) of the skin and heat pain detection thresholds (HPDT) may both have predictive abilities in regards to pain sensitivity and clinical pain states. The association between HPDT and secondary hyperalgesia, however, remains unsettled, and the dissimilarities in physiologic properties suggest that they may represent 2 distinctively different pain entities. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between HPDT and BTS-induced secondary hyperalgesia.

Methods

A sample of 121 healthy male participants was included and tested on 2 separate study days with BTS (45°C, 3 minutes), HPDT, and pain during thermal stimulation (45°C, 1 minute). Areas of secondary hyperalgesia were quantified after monofilament pinprick stimulation. The pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) and hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) were also applied.

Results

A significant association between HPDT and the size of the area of secondary hyperalgesia (p<0.0001) was found. The expected change in area of secondary hyperalgesia due to a 1-degree increase in HPDT was estimated to be −27.38 cm², 95% confidence interval (CI) of −37.77 to −16.98 cm², with an R² of 0.19. Likewise, a significant association between HADS-depression subscore and area of secondary hyperalgesia (p=0.046) was found, with an estimated expected change in secondary hyperalgesia to a 1-point increase in HADS-depression subscore of 11 cm², 95% CI (0.19–21.82), and with R² of 0.03. We found no significant associations between secondary hyperalgesia area and PCS score or pain during thermal stimulation.

Conclusion

HPDT and the area of secondary hyperalgesia after BTS are significantly associated; however, with an R² of only 19%, HPDT only offers a modest explanation of the inter-participant variation in the size of the secondary hyperalgesia area elicited by BTS.

Is the Volume of the Caudate Nuclei Associated With Area of Secondary Hyperalgesia? - Protocol for a 3-Tesla MRI Study of Healthy Volunteers

Background

Experience and development of pain may be influenced by a number of physiological, psychological, and psychosocial factors. In a previous study we found differences in neuronal activation to noxious stimulation, and microstructural neuroanatomical differences, when comparing healthy volunteers with differences in size of the area of secondary hyperalgesia following a standardized burn injury.

Objective

We aim to investigate the degree of association between the volume of pain-relevant structures in the brain and the size of the area of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization.

Methods

The study consists of one experimental day, in which whole-brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans will be conducted including T1-weighed three-dimensional anatomy scan, diffusion tensor imaging, and resting state functional MRI. Before the experimental day, all included participants will undergo experimental pain testing in a parallel study (Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02527395). Results from this experimental pain testing, as well as the size of the area of secondary hyperalgesia from the included participants, will be extracted from this parallel study.

Results

The association between the volume of pain-relevant structures in the brain and the area of secondary hyperalgesia will be investigated by linear regression of the estimated best linear unbiased predictors on the individual volumes of the pain relevant brain structures.

Conclusions

We plan to investigate the association between experimental pain testing parameters and the volume, connectivity, and resting state activity of pain-relevant structures in the brain. These results may improve our knowledge of the mechanisms responsible for the development of acute and chronic pain.

ClinicalTrial

Danish Research Ethics Committee (identifier: H-15010473). Danish Data Protection Agency (identifier: RH-2015-149). Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02567318; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02567318 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6i4OtP0Oi)

Is heat pain detection threshold associated with the area of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization? A study of healthy volunteers - design and detailed plan of analysis

Background

Several factors are believed to influence the development and experience of pain.

Human clinical pain models are central tools, in the investigation of basic physiologic pain responses, and can be applied in patients as well as in healthy volunteers. Each clinical pain model investigates different aspects of the human pain response.

Brief thermal sensitization induces a mild burn injury, resulting in development of primary hyperalgesia at the site of stimulation, and secondary hyperalgesia surrounding the site of stimulation. Central sensitization is believed to play an important role in the development of secondary hyperalgesia; however, a possible association of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization and other heat pain models remains unknown. Our aim with this study is to investigate how close the heat pain detection threshold is associated with the size of the area of secondary hyperalgesia induced by the clinical heat pain model: Brief thermal sensitization.

Methods and design

We aim to include 120 healthy participants. The participants will be tested on two separate study days with the following procedures: i) Brief thermal sensitization, ii) heat pain detection threshold and iii) pain during thermal stimulation. Additionally, the participants will be tested with the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaires.

We conducted statistical simulations based on data from our previous study, to estimate an empirical power of 99.9 % with α of 0.05. We define that an R² < 0.25 and predictive intervals larger than +/−150 cm² are indications of a weak association.

Discussion

The area of secondary hyperalgesia may serve as a quantitative measure of the central sensitization induced by cutaneous heat stimulation, and thus may be a biomarker of an individual’s pain sensitivity. The number of studies investigating secondary hyperalgesia is growing; however basic knowledge of the physiologic aspects of secondary hyperalgesia in humans is still incomplete. We therefore find it interesting to investigate if HPDT, a known quantitative sensory test, is associated with areas of secondary hyperalgesia following brief thermal sensitization

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02527395). Danish Research Ethics Committee (Identifier: H-8-2014-012). Danish Data Protection Agency (Identifier: 30-1436).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-016-0193-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.