CHF3381, a N-methyl-D-aspartate Receptor Antagonist and Monoamine Oxidase–A Inhibitor, Attenuates Secondary Hyperalgesia in a Human Pain Model

Within-subject, double-blinded, randomized, and placebo-controlled evaluation of the combined effects of the cannabinoid dronabinol and the opioid hydromorphone in a human laboratory pain model

This Phase II study evaluated analgesia, abuse liability, and cognitive performance of hydromorphone and oral delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC; dronabinol) using a within-subject, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, human laboratory trial. Healthy adults (N = 29) with no history of drug use disorder received combinations of placebo, hydromorphone (4 mg; oral), and dronabinol (2.5 mg, 5.0 mg, 10 mg; oral). Primary outcomes were quantitative sensory testing (QST) measures of acute (thermal, pressure pain; thermal, punctate probe temporal summation; cold pressor; conditioned pain modulation) and chronic pain (capsaicin 10% topical cream with thermal rekindling), measures of drug abuse liability, cognitive functioning, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were conducted within opioid-responders (endorsed >20 on a Drug Effect visual analog scale during the hydromorphone-only condition) and nonresponders. A consistent dose-effect relationship of dronabinol on hydromorphone across all measures was not observed. Analgesia only improved in the hydromorphone + dronabinol 2.5 mg condition. Hydromorphone + dronabinol 2.5 mg showed the lowest and hydromorphone+dronabinol 5 mg showed the highest risk for abuse. Hydromorphone+dronabinol 10 mg produced a high rate of dysphoric effects, and hydromorphone+dronabinol 5 mg and hydromorphone + dronabinol 10 mg produced AEs. Subgroup analyses showed subjective effects and abuse risk was increased among opioid responders and largely absent among nonresponders. Overall, only hydromorphone+dronabinol 2.5 mg modestly enhanced hydromorphone-based analgesia and hydromorphone + dronabinol 5 mg and 10 mg increased risk for abuse and AEs. These data can help inform opioid-sparing efforts in clinical pain populations. Demonstration that potential opioid effects varied as a function of participant opioid sensitivity (e.g., responder status) is a novel finding that warrants additional research.

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.

Experimenter- and Infrared Thermography-Derived Measures of Capsaicin-Induced Neurogenic Flare Among Non-Hispanic White and Black Adults

OBJECTIVE

Capsaicin is a widely utilized experimental pain stimulus; however, few studies have reported on ethnic differences in pain responses to capsaicin. The present study used infrared thermography to 1) measure differences in capsaicin-induced neurogenic flare between non-Hispanic black (NHB) and non-Hispanic white (NHW) adults and 2) determine the association between neurogenic flare and secondary hyperalgesia.

METHODS

Fifty-four participants (NHB N = 28) underwent heat/capsaicin sensitization model procedures. Neurogenic flare was examined using experimenter (i.e., subjective) and thermography (i.e., objective) measurements. A typically nonpainful mechanical punctate probe was used to measure secondary hyperalgesia.

RESULTS

Ethnic groups did not significantly differ in age, sex, marital status, or personal income. Although experimenters rated a significantly wider area of capsaicin-related neurogenic flare among NHW compared with NHB participants (F1, 52 = 8.33, P = 0.006), thermography results showed no differences between groups in neurogenic flares (F1, 52 = 0.01, P = 0.93). Further, although NHB individuals reported greater average pain during the capsaicin procedures compared with NHW individuals (NHB = 58.57 [3.67], NHW = 46.46 [3.81]; F2, 51 = 5.19, P = 0.03), the groups did not differ in secondary hyperalgesia (F2, 51 = 0.03, P = 0.86), and ethnicity did not moderate the association between neurogenic flare and secondary hyperalgesia (F3, 50 = 0.24, P = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings cautiously support the use of infrared thermography over subjective experimenter report when measuring neurogenic inflammation in diverse samples. However, infrared thermography should not be used as a diagnostic tool for pain, given the lack of association between these factors. Future research is warranted to replicate these findings in a larger and more diverse sample to determine accurate neurogenic inflammation measures across other ethnic minority populations.

Does Electroacupuncture Have Different Effects on Peripheral and Central Sensitization in Humans: A Randomized Controlled Study

Background

Acupuncture is used to reduce chronic musculoskeletal pain. The common mechanism underlying these types of pain are peripheral and/or central sensitization. In the clinical setting, it is difficult to separate the peripheral from the central component of pain. Heat/capsaicin 45°C/0.075%-induced hyperalgesia provides a stable, human central sensitization model in which the peripheral component is also assessed.

Aim

This randomized, sham-controlled study aimed to investigate the effect of electroacupuncture (EA) on the severity of heat (peripheral sensitization) and mechanical hyperalgesia (central sensitization) in a heat/capsaicin pain model in humans.

Methods

Twenty-six healthy young participants (24 ± 3.9 years) were recruited. After baseline assessment, heat/capsaicin 45°C/0.075% was applied to the non-dominant forearm to induce hyperalgesia. The primary outcome measures were the size of the area of mechanical hyperalgesia, intensity of pain to heat stimulation and heat pain thresholds. The intensity of pain was recorded using modified 10-cm visual analogues scales (VAS). Participants were assessed at 70 min after the initial application of capsaicin then randomly allocated to receive either real electroacupuncture (REA, n = 14) or sham non-invasive EA (SEA, n = 12) for 30 min. The main outcome measures were assessed again immediately and then 90 min following EA. Credibility of blinding was assessed. Data were analyzed with t-tests or analysis of variance (ANOVA) where appropriate.

Results

After the model was established, the area of mechanical hyperalgesia was formed (55.64 cm²), as was heat hyperalgesia, as the rating to heat stimulation, increased from 2/10 to 6/10. The REA and SEA groups were comparable. Immediately after the allocated acupuncture treatment, the rating to heat stimulation was statistically significantly lower in the REA group (2.94 ± 1.64) than in the SEA group (4.62 ± 2.26) (p < 0.05). The area of mechanical hyperalgesia reduced significantly without any group difference. No group difference was detected in heat pain threshold. Blinding of the participants was successful.

Conclusion

Peripheral and central sensitization in the heat/capsaicin 45°C/0.075% model responded to EA differently, suggesting that acupuncture analgesia could vary, depending on the types of pain. This observation may explain some inconsistent findings from clinical trials of acupuncture.

Dose-related beneficial and harmful effects of gabapentin in postoperative pain management - post hoc analyses from a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses

Background

During the last 15 years, gabapentin has become an established component of postoperative pain treatment. Gabapentin has been employed in a wide range of doses, but little is known about the optimal dose, providing the best balance between benefit and harm. This systematic review with meta-analyses aimed to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of various doses of gabapentin administered to surgical patients.

Materials and methods

Data in this paper were derived from an original review, and the subgroup analyses were predefined in an International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews published protocol: PROSPERO (ID: CRD42013006538). The methods followed Cochrane guidelines. The Cochrane Library’s CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Google Scholar, and FDA database were searched for relevant trials. Randomized clinical trials comparing gabapentin versus placebo were included. Four different dose intervals were investigated: 0–350, 351–700, 701–1050, and >1050 mg. Primary co-outcomes were 24-hour morphine consumption and serious adverse events (SAEs), with emphasis put on trials with low risk of bias.

Results

One hundred and twenty-two randomized clinical trials, with 8466 patients, were included. Sixteen were overall low risk of bias. No consistent increase in morphine-sparing effect was observed with increasing doses of gabapentin from the trials with low risk of bias. Analyzing all trials, the smallest and the highest dose subgroups demonstrated numerically the most prominent reduction in morphine consumption. Twenty-seven trials reported 72 SAEs, of which 83% were reported in the >1050 mg subgroup. No systematic increase in SAEs was observed with increasing doses of gabapentin.

Conclusion

Data were sparse, and the small number of trials with low risk of bias is a major limitation for firm conclusions. Taking these limitations into account, we were not able to demonstrate a clear relationship between the dosage of gabapentin and opioid-sparing or harmful effects. These subgroup analyses are exploratory and hypothesis-generating for future trialists.

Gabapentin in procedure-specific postoperative pain management - preplanned subgroup analyses from a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses

Background

It has been argued that postoperative pain treatment should be “procedure-specific”, since different analgesics may have specific effects dependent on the surgical procedure. The aim of the present subgroup analysis was to compare the beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative gabapentin treatment in different surgical procedures.

Methods

Relevant databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing gabapentin versus placebo. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcomes were differences in 24-h morphine consumption, and serious adverse events (SAE) between surgical procedures. These subgroup analyses were predefined in a PRISMA compliant systematic review registered at PROSPERO (ID: CRD42013006538). It was predefined that conclusions should primarily be based on trials classified as overall low risk of bias.

Results

Seventy-four RCTs with 5645 patients were included, assessing benefit and harm in cholecystectomy, hysterectomy, mastectomy, and arthroplasty surgery, spinal surgery, and thoracic surgery.

Only eight of 74 trials were classified as overall low risk of bias limiting our ability to conclude on the estimates in most meta-analyses. The differences between surgical procedures in these trials were not statistically significant when tested for subgroup differences. Fifteen trials with 1377 patients reported a total of 59 SAEs, most of which were observed in the thoracic surgery group.

Conclusion

Both beneficial and harmful effects in these subgroup analyses were influenced by bias and insufficient data, limiting conclusions. With these limitations, we could not adequately test for differences in beneficial or harmful outcomes between six surgical subgroups undergoing perioperative gabapentin treatment.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-017-0373-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pain catastrophizing may moderate the association between pain and secondary hyperalgesia

Catastrophizing, a persistent negative mental set characterized by helplessness, rumination, and magnification of pain sensations, has a potent effect on pain report and clinical outcomes. Previous studies have documented an association between cognitive factors and central sensitization. The current analysis sought to test the potential modulating effect of pain catastrophizing on the association between capsaicin pain and the region of secondary hyperalgesia. Thirty-eight healthy individuals (50% women, mean age = 25.7, SD = 5.3) completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), then underwent topical application of 10% capsaicin, which was covered by a thermode maintained at 40°C for 90-min. Following removal of the capsaicin, the region of secondary hyperalgesia was determined. Hayes' PROCESS macro was employed to examine catastrophizing's potential moderating effect, which did not reveal a significant association between capsaicin pain ratings and the region of secondary hyperalgesia (β = 15.1, p = .06). Though PCS was not associated with area of secondary hyperalgesia (β = 23.9, p = .29), a significant interaction was present between PCS and capsaicin pain ratings (β = 3.7, p = .0004). Specifically, those endorsing higher catastrophizing levels and higher pain ratings experienced the greatest areas of secondary hyperalgesia. The Johnson-Neyman technique was used to determine the regional effect of the moderation, which indicated that when PCS scores were ≥10.6, capsaicin pain significantly moderated the association between pain and area of secondary hyperalgesia. These results suggest that catastrophizing plays an important role in the area of secondary hyperalgesia, and potentially central sensitization, warranting further testing in future research.

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.

Gabapentin for post-operative pain management - a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses

BACKGROUND

Perioperative pain treatment often consist of combinations of non-opioid and opioid analgesics, 'multimodal analgesia', in which gabapentin is currently used. The aim was to document beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative gabapentin treatment.

METHODS

Randomized clinical trials comparing gabapentin vs. placebo or active placebo in adult surgical patients receiving gabapentin perioperatively were included. This review was conducted using Cochrane standards, trial sequential analysis (TSA), and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The primary outcomes were 24-h opioid consumption and incidence of serious adverse events (SAE).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-two trials with 9498 patients were included. Thirteen trials with low risk of bias reported a reduction in 24-h opioid consumption of 3.1 mg [0.5, 5.6] [corrected]. In the analysis of gabapentin as add-on analgesic to another non-opioid analgesic regimen found a mean reduction in 24-h morphine consumption of 1.2 mg [-0.3, 2.6; TSA-adjusted CI: -0.3, 2.6] in trials with low risk of bias. [corrected]. Nine trials with low risk of bias reported a risk ratio of SAEs of 1.61 [0.91; 2.86; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.57, 4.57].

CONCLUSION

Based on GRADE assessment of the primary outcomes in trials with low risk of bias, the results are low or very low quality of evidence due to imprecision, inconsistency, and in some outcomes indirectness. Firm evidence for use of gabapentin is lacking as clinically relevant beneficial effect of gabapentin may be absent and harm is imminent, especially when added to multimodal analgesia.

A literature review on the pharmacological sensitivity of human evoked hyperalgesia pain models

AIMS

Human evoked pain models can be used to determine the efficacy of new and existing analgesics and to aid in the identification of new targets. Aspects of neuropathic pain can be simulated by inducing hyperalgesia resulting from provoked sensitization. The present literature review aimed to provide insight into the sensitivity of different hyperalgesia and allodynia models of pharmacological treatment.

METHODS

A literature search was performed to identify randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that included human hyperalgesia pain models and investigated the pharmacodynamic effects of different classes of drugs.

RESULTS

Three hyperalgesia models [ultraviolet B (UVB) irradiation, capsaicin and thermode burn] have been used extensively. Assessment of hyperalgesia/allodynia and pharmacological effect are measured using challenge tests, which generally comprise thermal (heat/cold) or mechanical stimulation (pin-prick, stroking or impact). The UVB model was sensitive to the antihyperalgesic effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids. The capsaicin model was partially sensitive to opioids. The burn model did not detect any antihyperalgesic effects when NSAIDs or local anaesthetics were administered but responded to the effects of N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists by moderately reducing mechanical hyperalgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on pharmacological sensitivity, the UVB model adequately reflects inflammatory pain and was sensitive to NSAIDs and opioids. Findings from the capsaicin and burn models raised questions about the translatability of these models to the treatment of neuropathic pain. There is a need for a reproducible and predictive model of neuropathic pain, either in healthy subjects or in patients.

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)

Distinct BOLD fMRI Responses of Capsaicin-Induced Thermal Sensation Reveal Pain-Related Brain Activation in Nonhuman Primates

Background

Approximately 20% of the adult population suffer from chronic pain that is not adequately treated by current therapies, highlighting a great need for improved treatment options. To develop effective analgesics, experimental human and animal models of pain are critical. Topically/intra-dermally applied capsaicin induces hyperalgesia and allodynia to thermal and tactile stimuli that mimics chronic pain and is a useful translation from preclinical research to clinical investigation. Many behavioral and self-report studies of pain have exploited the use of the capsaicin pain model, but objective biomarker correlates of the capsaicin augmented nociceptive response in nonhuman primates remains to be explored.

Methodology

Here we establish an aversive capsaicin-induced fMRI model using non-noxious heat stimuli in Cynomolgus monkeys (n = 8). BOLD fMRI data were collected during thermal challenge (ON:20 s/42°C; OFF:40 s/35°C, 4-cycle) at baseline and 30 min post-capsaicin (0.1 mg, topical, forearm) application. Tail withdrawal behavioral studies were also conducted in the same animals using 42°C or 48°C water bath pre- and post- capsaicin application (0.1 mg, subcutaneous, tail).

Principal Findings

Group comparisons between pre- and post-capsaicin application revealed significant BOLD signal increases in brain regions associated with the ‘pain matrix’, including somatosensory, frontal, and cingulate cortices, as well as the cerebellum (paired t-test, p<0.02, n = 8), while no significant change was found after the vehicle application. The tail withdrawal behavioral study demonstrated a significant main effect of temperature and a trend towards capsaicin induced reduction of latency at both temperatures.

Conclusions

These findings provide insights into the specific brain regions involved with aversive, ‘pain-like’, responses in a nonhuman primate model. Future studies may employ both behavioral and fMRI measures as translational biomarkers to gain deeper understanding of pain processing and evaluate the preclinical efficacy of novel analgesics.

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.

Demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones: Punctate stimulation pressure matters

BACKGROUND

Secondary hyperalgesia is increased sensitivity in normal tissue near an injury, and it is a measure of central sensitization reflecting injury-related effects on the CNS. Secondary hyperalgesia areas (SHAs), usually assessed by polyamide monofilaments, are important outcomes in studies of analgesic drug effects in humans. However, since the methods applied in demarcating the secondary hyperalgesia zone seem inconsistent across studies, we examined the effect of a standardized approach upon the measurement of SHA following a first degree burn injury (BI).

NEW METHOD

The study was a two-observer, test-retest study with the two sessions separated by 6wk. An observer-blinded design adjusted to examine day-to-day and observer-to-observer variability in SHA was used. In 23 healthy volunteers (12 females/11 males) a BI was induced by a contact thermode (47.0°C, 420s, 2.5×5.0cm(2)). The SHA, demarcated by polyamide monofilaments (bending force: 0.2, 69 and 2569mN) and a "weighted-pin" stimulator (512mN), were assessed 45 to 75min after each BI.

RESULTS

A random effect, linear mixed model demonstrated a logarithmic correlation between elicited skin pressures (mN/mm(2)) and the SHAs (P<0.0001). No day-to-day or observer-to-observer differences in SHAs were observed. Intraclass correlation coefficients, in the range of 0.51 to 0.84, indicated a moderate to almost perfect reliability between observers.

COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHODS

No standardized approach in SHA-assessment has hitherto been presented.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to demonstrate that demarcation of secondary hyperalgesia zones depends on the developed pressure of the punctate stimulator used.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy attenuates central sensitization induced by a thermal injury in humans

BACKGROUND

Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2 ) treatment has in animal experiments demonstrated antinociceptive effects. It was hypothesized that these effects would attenuate secondary hyperalgesia areas (SHAs), an expression of central sensitization, after a first-degree thermal injury in humans.

METHODS

Seventeen healthy volunteers were examined during two sessions using a randomized crossover design. Volunteers were studied during control conditions (ambient pressure, FI O2  = 0.21) and during HBO2 (2.4 standard atmosphere, FI O2  = 1.0, 90 min) conditions in a pressure chamber. Quantitative sensory testing, including assessment of SHAs was performed.

RESULTS

A statistically significant overall attenuation of SHAs was seen during the HBO2 sessions compared with the control-sessions (P = 0.011). In the eight volunteers starting with the HBO2 session, no difference in SHAs compared with control was demonstrated. However, in the nine volunteers starting with the control session, a statistical significant attenuation of SHAs was demonstrated in the HBO2 session (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that HBO2 therapy in humans attenuates central sensitization induced by a thermal skin injury, compared with control. These new and original findings in humans corroborate animal experimental data. The thermal injury model may give impetus to future human neurophysiological studies exploring the central effects of hyperbaric oxygen treatment.

Spinal cord injury induced neuropathic pain: Molecular targets and therapeutic approaches

Neuropathic pain, especially that resulting from spinal cord injury, is a tremendous clinical challenge. A myriad of biological changes have been implicated in producing these pain states including cellular interactions, extracellular proteins, ion channel expression, and epigenetic influences. Physiological consequences of these changes are varied and include functional deficits and pain responses. Developing therapies that effectively address the cause of these symptoms require a deeper knowledge of alterations in the molecular pathways. Matrix metalloproteinases and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases are two promising therapeutic targets. Matrix metalloproteinases interact with and influence many of the studied pain pathways. Gene expression of ion channels and inflammatory mediators clearly contributes to neuropathic pain. Localized and time dependent targeting of these proteins could alleviate and even prevent neuropathic pain from developing. Current therapeutic options for neuropathic pain are limited primarily to analgesics targeting the opioid pathway. Therapies directed at molecular targets are highly desirable and in early stages of development. These include transplantation of exogenously engineered cell populations and targeted gene manipulation. This review describes specific molecular targets amenable to therapeutic intervention using currently available delivery systems.

Neuropathic pain: role of inflammation, immune response, and ion channel activity in central injury mechanisms

Neuropathic pain (NP) is a significant and disabling clinical problem with very few therapeutic treatment options available. A major priority is to identify the molecular mechanisms responsible for NP. Although many seemingly relevant pathways have been identified, more research is needed before effective clinical interventions can be produced. Initial insults to the nervous system, such as spinal cord injury (SCI), are often compounded by secondary mechanisms such as inflammation, the immune response, and the changing expression of receptors and ion channels. The consequences of these secondary effects myriad and compound those elicited by the primary injury. Chronic NP syndromes following SCI can greatly complicate the clinical treatment of the primary injury and result in high comorbidity. In this review, we will describe physiological outcomes associated with SCI along with some of the mechanisms known to contribute to chronic NP development.

Reporting of sample size calculations in analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review

Sample size calculations determine the number of participants required to have sufficiently high power to detect a given treatment effect. In this review, we examined the reporting quality of sample size calculations in 172 publications of double-blind randomized controlled trials of noninvasive pharmacologic or interventional (ie, invasive) pain treatments published in European Journal of Pain, Journal of Pain, and Pain from January 2006 through June 2013. Sixty-five percent of publications reported a sample size calculation but only 38% provided all elements required to replicate the calculated sample size. In publications reporting at least 1 element, 54% provided a justification for the treatment effect used to calculate sample size, and 24% of studies with continuous outcome variables justified the variability estimate. Publications of clinical pain condition trials reported a sample size calculation more frequently than experimental pain model trials (77% vs 33%, P < .001) but did not differ in the frequency of reporting all required elements. No significant differences in reporting of any or all elements were detected between publications of trials with industry and nonindustry sponsorship. Twenty-eight percent included a discrepancy between the reported number of planned and randomized participants. This study suggests that sample size calculation reporting in analgesic trial publications is usually incomplete. Investigators should provide detailed accounts of sample size calculations in publications of clinical trials of pain treatments, which is necessary for reporting transparency and communication of pre-trial design decisions.

PERSPECTIVE

In this systematic review of analgesic clinical trials, sample size calculations and the required elements (eg, treatment effect to be detected; power level) were incompletely reported. A lack of transparency regarding sample size calculations may raise questions about the appropriateness of the calculated sample size.

Diabetes-causing gene, kruppel-like factor 11, modulates the antinociceptive response of chronic ethanol intake

BACKGROUND

Alcohol (EtOH [ethanol]) is an antinociceptive agent, working in part, by reducing sensitivity to painful stimuli. The transcription factor Kruppel-like factor 11 (KLF11), a human diabetes-causing gene that also regulates the neurotransmitter metabolic enzymes monoamine oxidase (MAO), has recently been identified as an EtOH-inducible gene. However, its role in antinociception remains unknown. Consequently, we investigated the function of KLF11 in chronic EtOH-induced antinociception using a genetically engineered knockout mouse model.

METHODS

Wild-type (Klf11(+/+) ) and KLF11 knockout (Klf11(-/-) ) mice were fed a liquid diet containing EtOH for 28 days with increasing amounts of EtOH from 0% up to a final concentration of 6.4%, representing a final diet containing 36% of calories primarily from EtOH. Control mice from both genotypes were fed liquid diet without EtOH for 28 days. The EtOH-induced antinociceptive effect was determined using the tail-flick test before and after EtOH exposure (on day 29). In addition, the enzyme activity and mRNA levels of MAO A and MAO B were measured by real-time RT-PCR and enzyme assays, respectively.

RESULTS

EtOH produced an antinociceptive response to thermal pain in Klf11(+/+) mice, as expected. In contrast, deletion of KLF11 in the Klf11(-/-) mice abolished the EtOH-induced antinociceptive effect. The mRNA and protein levels of KLF11 were significantly increased in the brain prefrontal cortex of Klf11(+/+) mice exposed to EtOH compared with control Klf11(+/+) mice. Furthermore, MAO enzyme activities were affected differently in Klf11 wild-type versus Klf11 knockout mice exposed to chronic EtOH. Chronic EtOH intake significantly increased MAO B activity in Klf11(+/+) mice.

CONCLUSIONS

The data show KLF11 modulation of EtOH-induced antinociception. The KLF11-targeted MAO B enzyme may contribute more significantly to EtOH-induced antinociception. Thus, this study revealed a new role for the KLF11 gene in the mechanisms underlying the antinociceptive effects of chronic EtOH exposure.

Pregabalin and dexamethasone improves post-operative pain treatment after tonsillectomy

BACKGROUND

Post-tonsillectomy pain can be severe. We investigated the analgesic effect from combinations of paracetamol, pregabalin and dexamethasone in adults undergoing tonsillectomy.

METHODS

In this randomized double-blind study, 131 patients were assigned to either group A (paracetamol+placebo), group B (paracetamol+pregabalin+placebo) or group C (paracetamol+pregabalin+dexamethasone). Pre-operatively, patients received either paracetamol 1000 mg, pregabalin 300 mg, dexamethasone 8 mg or placebo according to their allocation. Post-operative pain treatment included paracetamol 1000 mg 4× and ketobemidone 2.5 mg p.n. Ketobemidone consumption, pain scores [visual analogue scale (VAS)], nausea, sedation, dizziness, number of vomits and consumption of ondansetron were recorded 2, 4 and 24 h after the operation. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The mean 24-h VAS-pain score at rest was reduced in group C (P<0.003) vs. group A. The mean 24-h VAS-pain scores during swallowing were reduced in group B (P=0.009) and group C (P<0.003) vs. group A. Consumption of ketobemidone (1-4 h post-operatively) was lower in group B (P=0.003) and group C (P=0.003) vs. group A. The mean 24-h dizziness score was higher in group B (P<0.003) and C (P=0.003) vs. group A. Other parameters including re-operation for post-tonsillectomy bleeding were not different between groups.

CONCLUSION

Pregabalin and pregabalin+dexamethasone reduced post-operative pain scores and consumption of ketobemidone following tonsillectomy. Dizziness was increased with pregabalin.

Self-reported sleep duration associated with distraction analgesia, hyperemia, and secondary hyperalgesia in the heat-capsaicin nociceptive model

Although sleep deprivation is known to heighten pain sensitivity, the mechanisms by which sleep modifies nociception are largely unknown. Few studies of sleep-pain interactions have utilized quantitative sensory testing models that implicate specific underlying physiologic mechanisms. One possibility, which is beginning to receive attention, is that differences in sleep may alter the analgesic effects of distraction. We utilized the heat-capsaicin nociceptive model to examine whether self-reported habitual sleep duration is associated with distraction analgesia, the degree of secondary hyperalgesia and skin flare, markers implicating both central and peripheral processes that heighten pain. Twenty-eight healthy participants completed three experimental sessions in a randomized within subjects design. In the pain only condition, pain was induced for approximately 70-min via application of heat and capsaicin to the dorsum of the non-dominant hand. Verbal pain ratings were obtained at regular intervals. In the distraction condition, identical procedures were followed, but during heat-capsaicin pain, subjects played a series of video games. The third session involved assessing performance on the video games (no capsaicin). Participants indicated their normal self-reported habitual sleep duration over the past month. Individuals who slept less than 6.5 h/night in the month prior to the study experienced significantly less behavioral analgesia, increased skin flare and augmented secondary hyperalgesia. These findings suggest that reduced sleep time is associated with diminished analgesic benefits from distraction and/or individuals obtaining less sleep have a reduced ability to disengage from pain-related sensations. The secondary hyperalgesia finding may implicate central involvement, whereas enhanced skin flare response suggests that sleep duration may also impact peripheral inflammatory mechanisms.

Pregabalin and dexamethasone in combination with paracetamol for postoperative pain control after abdominal hysterectomy. A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Multimodal analgesia may be important for optimal postoperative pain treatment and facilitation of early mobilization and recovery. We investigated the analgesic effect of pregabalin and dexamethasone in combination with paracetamol after abdominal hysterectomy.

METHODS

One hundred and sixteen patients were randomly assigned to either group A (paracetamol+placebo x 2), group B (paracetamol+pregabalin+placebo) or group C (paracetamol+pregabalin+dexamethasone). According to randomization and preoperatively, patients received paracetamol 1000 mg, pregabalin 300 mg, dexamethasone 8 mg or placebo. General anaesthesia was performed. Postoperative pain treatment was paracetamol 1000 mg x 4 and patient-controlled intravenous morphine, 2.5 mg bolus. Nausea was treated with ondansetron. Morphine consumption, pain score (visual analogue scale) at rest and during mobilization, nausea, sedation, dizziness, number of vomits and consumption of ondansetron were recorded 2, 4 and 24 h after the operation. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The 24-h morphine consumption and pain score, both at rest and during mobilization, were not significantly different between treatment groups. The mean nausea score (P=0.002) was reduced in group C vs. A. The number of vomits was significantly reduced in both group B (P=0.041) and C (P=0.001) vs. A. Consumption of ondansetron was reduced in group C vs. A and B (P<0.001). Other side effects were not different between groups.

CONCLUSION

Combinations of paracetamol and pregabalin, or paracetamol, pregabalin and dexamethasone did not reduce morphine consumption and pain score compared with paracetamol alone for patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy. Dexamethasone reduced nausea, vomiting and use of ondansetron.

Gabapentin and postoperative pain: a qualitative and quantitative systematic review, with focus on procedure

Background

Gabapentin is an antiepileptic drug used in a variety of chronic pain conditions. Increasing numbers of randomized trials indicate that gabapentin is effective as a postoperative analgesic. This procedure-specific systematic review aims to analyse the 24-hour postoperative effect of gabapentin on acute pain in adults.

Methods

Medline, The Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched for double-blind randomized placebo controlled trials of gabapentin for postoperative pain relief compared with placebo, in adults undergoing a surgical procedure.

Qualitative analysis of postoperative effectiveness was evaluated by assessment of significant difference (P < 0.05) in pain relief using consumption of supplemental analgesic and pain scores between study groups.

Quantitative analyses of combined data from similar procedures, were performed by calculating the weighted mean difference (WMD) of 24-hour cumulated opioid requirements, and the WMD for visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, (early (6 h) and late (24 h) postoperatively), between study groups. Side-effects (nausea, vomiting, dizziness and sedation) were extracted for calculation of their relative risk (RR).

Results

Twenty-three trials with 1529 patients were included. In 12 of 16 studies with data on postoperative opioid requirement, the reported 24-hour opioid consumption was significantly reduced with gabapentin. Quantitative analysis of five trials in abdominal hysterectomy showed a significant reduction in morphine consumption (WMD – 13 mg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -19 to -8 mg), and in early pain scores at rest (WMD – 11 mm on the VAS, 95% CI -12 to -2 mm) and during activity (WMD -8 mm on the VAS; 95% CI -13 to -3 mm), favouring gabapentin. In spinal surgery, (4 trials), analyses demonstrated a significant reduction in morphine consumption (WMD of – 31 mg (95%CI – 53 to -10 mg) and pain scores, early (WMD – 17 mm on the VAS; 95 % CI -31 to -3 mm) and late (WMD -12 mm on the VAS; 95% CI -23 to -1 mm) also favouring gabapentin treatment. Nausea was improved with gabapentin in abdominal hysterectomy (RR 0.7; 95 % CI 0.5 to 0.9). Other side-effects were unaffected.

Conclusion

Perioperative use of gabapentin has a significant 24-hour opioid sparing effect and improves pain score for both abdominal hysterectomy and spinal surgery. Nausea may be reduced in abdominal hysterectomy.