Effects of an opioid antagonist on pain intensity and withdrawal reflexes during induction of hypnotic analgesia in high- and low-hypnotizable volunteers

Studies in patients with temporomandibular disorders pain: Can scales of hypnotic susceptibility predict the outcome on pain relief?

Many medical conditions are claimed to benefit when hypnosis is incorporated into their treatment. For some conditions, the claims are largely anecdotal, but the treatment of pain stands out in two ways. First, there is a strong body of evidence that hypnosis can produce clinically useful analgesic effects. Second, since innocuous pain can be induced in the laboratory, the process can be explored rigorously. This idea assumes that experimentally induced pain and clinical pain behave identically. We describe using experimentally induced pain in patients already suffering from temporomandibular disorders. Scanning results indicate that the pain and its amelioration are the same in the two circumstances. Moreover, the absence of any impact upon a nociceptive trigemino-facial reflex implies that the impact of hypnosis is purely cortical. Finally, we address the observation that clinical success correlates poorly with hypnotic susceptibility scores. It is proposed that a painful experimental situation induces anxiety. This, like hypnosis, has been associated with an emphasis on right hemisphere activity. Thus, clinical anxiety may render a person more responsive to hypnosis than would be indicated by a susceptibility test delivered in stress-free circumstances.

Modulation of the nociceptive flexion reflex by conservative therapy in patients and healthy people: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

The nociceptive flexion reflex (NFR) is a spinally mediated withdrawal response and is used as an electrophysiological marker of descending modulation of spinal nociception. Chemical and pharmacological modulation of nociceptive neurotransmission at the spinal level has been evidenced by direct effects of neurotransmitters and pharmacological agents on the NFR. Largely unexplored are, however, the effects of nonpharmacological noninvasive conservative interventions on the NFR. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed and reported following the PRISMA guidelines to determine whether and to what extent spinal nociception measured through the assessment of the NFR is modulated by conservative therapy in patients and healthy individuals. Five electronic databases were searched to identify relevant articles. Retrieved articles were screened on eligibility using the predefined inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was investigated according to Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool for randomized trials. The evidence synthesis for this review was conducted in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Thirty-six articles were included. Meta-analyses provided low-quality evidence showing that conservative therapy decreases NFR area and NFR magnitude and moderate-quality evidence for increases in NFR latency. This suggests that conservative interventions can exert immediate central effects by activating descending inhibitory pathways to reduce spinal nociception. Such interventions may help prevent and treat chronic pain characterized by enhanced spinal nociception. Furthermore, given the responsiveness of the NFR to conservative interventions, the NFR assessment seems to be an appropriate tool in empirical evaluations of treatment strategies.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020164495.

Polymorphism of Opioid Receptors μ1 in Highly Hypnotizable Subjects

The possible cooperation between hypnotizability-related and placebo mechanisms in pain modulation has not been consistently assessed. Here, we investigate possible genetic bases for such cooperation. The OPRM1 gene, which encodes the μ1 opioid receptor-the primary site of action for endogenous and exogenous opioids-is polymorphic in the general population for the missense mutation Asn40Asp (A118G, rs1799971). The minor allele 118G results in decreased levels of OPRM1 mRNA and protein. As a consequence, G carriers are less responsive to opioids. The aim of the study was to investigate whether hypnotizability is associated with the presence of the OPRM1 polymorphism. Forty-three high and 60 low hypnotizable individuals, as well as 162 controls, were genotyped for the A118G polymorphism of OPRM1. The frequency of the G allele was significantly higher in highs compared to both lows and controls. Findings suggest that an inefficient opioid system may be a distinctive characteristic of highs and that hypnotic assessment may predict lower responsiveness to opioids.

Pain modulation as a function of hypnotizability: Diffuse noxious inhibitory control induced by cold pressor test vs explicit suggestions of analgesia

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of explicit suggestions of analgesia and of the activation of the Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Control (DNIC) by cold pressor test on pain perception and heart rate in healthy participants with high (highs, N=18), low (lows, N=18) and intermediate scores of hypnotizability (mediums, N=15) out of hypnosis. Pain reports and the stimulus-locked heart rate changes induced by electrical nociceptive stimulation of the left hand were studied in the absence of concomitant stimuli (Control), during suggestions of analgesia (SUGG, glove analgesia) and during cold pressor test used as a conditioning stimulus to the right hand (DNIC, water temperature=10-12°C) in the REAL session. Participants were submitted also to a SHAM session in which the DNIC water temperature was 30°C and the suggestions for analgesia were substituted with weather forecast information. Both suggestions and DNIC reduced pain significantly in all subjects; however, the percentage of reduction was significantly larger in highs (pain intensity=55% of the control condition) than in mediums (70%) and lows (80%) independently of the REAL/SHAM session and of the specific pain manipulation. Heart rate was not modulated consistently with pain experience. Findings indicate that both suggestions and DNIC influence pain experience as a function of hypnotizability and suggest that both sensory and cognitive mechanisms co-operate in DNIC induced analgesia.

Hypnotizability and Placebo Analgesia in Waking and Hypnosis as Modulators of Auditory Startle Responses in Healthy Women: An ERP Study

We evaluated the influence of hypnotizability, pain expectation, placebo analgesia in waking and hypnosis on tonic pain relief. We also investigated how placebo analgesia affects somatic responses (eye blink) and N100 and P200 waves of event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by auditory startle probes. Although expectation plays an important role in placebo and hypnotic analgesia, the neural mechanisms underlying these treatments are still poorly understood. We used the cold cup test (CCT) to induce tonic pain in 53 healthy women. Placebo analgesia was initially produced by manipulation, in which the intensity of pain induced by the CCT was surreptitiously reduced after the administration of a sham analgesic cream. Participants were then tested in waking and hypnosis under three treatments: (1) resting (Baseline); (2) CCT-alone (Pain); and (3) CCT plus placebo cream for pain relief (Placebo). For each painful treatment, we assessed pain and distress ratings, eye blink responses, N100 and P200 amplitudes. We used LORETA analysis of N100 and P200 waves, as elicited by auditory startle, to identify cortical regions sensitive to pain reduction through placebo and hypnotic analgesia. Higher pain expectation was associated with higher pain reductions. In highly hypnotizable participants placebo treatment produced significant reductions of pain and distress perception in both waking and hypnosis condition. P200 wave, during placebo analgesia, was larger in the frontal left hemisphere while placebo analgesia, during hypnosis, involved the activity of the left hemisphere including the occipital region. These findings demonstrate that hypnosis and placebo analgesia are different processes of top-down regulation. Pain reduction was associated with larger EMG startle amplitudes, N100 and P200 responses, and enhanced activity within the frontal, parietal, and anterior and posterior cingulate gyres. LORETA results showed that placebo analgesia modulated pain-responsive areas known to reflect the ongoing pain experience.

Pain modulation in waking and hypnosis in women: event-related potentials and sources of cortical activity

Using a strict subject selection procedure, we tested in High and Low Hypnotizable subjects (HHs and LHs) whether treatments of hypoalgesia and hyperalgesia, as compared to a relaxation-control, differentially affected subjective pain ratings and somatosensory event-related potentials (SERPs) during painful electric stimulation. Treatments were administered in waking and hypnosis conditions. LHs showed little differentiation in pain and distress ratings between hypoalgesia and hyperalgesia treatments, whereas HHs showed a greater spread in the instructed direction. HHs had larger prefrontal N140 and P200 waves of the SERPs during hypnotic hyperalgesia as compared to relaxation-control treatment. Importantly, HHs showed significant smaller frontocentral N140 and frontotemporal P200 waves during hypnotic hypoalgesia. LHs did not show significant differences for these SERP waves among treatments in both waking and hypnosis conditions. Source localization (sLORETA) method revealed significant activations of the bilateral primary somatosensory (BA3), middle frontal gyrus (BA6) and anterior cingulate cortices (BA24). Activity of these contralateral regions significantly correlated with subjective numerical pain scores for control treatment in waking condition. Moreover, multivariate regression analyses distinguished the contralateral BA3 as the only region reflecting a stable pattern of pain coding changes across all treatments in waking and hypnosis conditions. More direct testing showed that hypnosis reduced the strength of the association of pain modulation and brain activity changes at BA3. sLORETA in HHs revealed, for the N140 wave, that during hypnotic hyperalgesia, there was an increased activity within medial, supramarginal and superior frontal gyri, and cingulated gyrus (BA32), while for the P200 wave, activity was increased in the superior (BA22), middle (BA37), inferior temporal (BA19) gyri and superior parietal lobule (BA7). Hypnotic hypoalgesia in HHs, for N140 wave, showed reduced activity within medial and superior frontal gyri (BA9,8), paraippocampal gyrus (BA34), and postcentral gyrus (BA1), while for the P200, activity was reduced within middle and superior frontal gyri (BA9 and BA10), anterior cingulate (BA33), cuneus (BA19) and sub-lobar insula (BA13). These findings demonstrate that hypnotic suggestions can exert a top-down modulatory effect on attention/preconscious brain processes involved in pain perception.

Hypnotic relaxation results in elevated thresholds of sensory detection but not of pain detection

Background

Many studies show an effectiveness of hypnotic analgesia. It has been discussed whether the analgesic effect is mainly caused by the relaxation that is concomitant to hypnosis. This study was designed to evaluate the effects of hypnotic relaxation suggestion on different somatosensory detection and pain thresholds.

Methods

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) measurements were performed before and during hypnosis in twenty-three healthy subjects on the dorsum of the right hand. Paired t-test was used to compare threshold changes. The influence of hypnotic susceptibility was evaluated by calculating correlation coefficients for threshold changes and hypnotic susceptibility (Harvard group scale).

Results

During hypnosis significantly changed somatosensory thresholds (reduced function) were observed for the following sensory detection thresholds: Cold Detection Threshold (CDT), Warm Detection Threshold (WDT), Thermal Sensory Limen (TSL) and Mechanical Detection Threshold (MDT). The only unchanged sensory detection threshold was Vibration Detection Threshold (VDT). No significant changes were observed for the determined pain detection thresholds (Cold Pain Thresholds, Heat Pain Thresholds, Mechanical Pain Sensitivity, Dynamic Mechanical Allodynia, Wind-up Ratio and Pressure Pain Threshold). No correlation of hypnotic susceptibility and threshold changes were detected.

Conclusion

Hypnotic relaxation without a specific analgesic suggestion results in thermal and mechanical detection, but not pain threshold changes. We thus conclude that a relaxation suggestion has no genuine effect on sensory pain thresholds.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02261155 (9^th October 2014).

Effects of hypnotic focused analgesia on dental pain threshold

The rate, intensity, and selectivity of hypnotic focused analgesia (HFA) were tested with dental pulp stimulation. Thirty-one healthy subjects were hypnotized, and hypnotic suggestions were given for anesthesia of the right mandibular arch. A posthypnotic suggestion of persisting analgesia was also given. The pain threshold of the first premolar was bilaterally measured before, during, and after hypnosis using a pulp tester. During hypnosis, the pain threshold increased significantly (p < .0001) for both sides. The posthypnotic right pain threshold was also significantly (p < .0015) higher than in the basal condition.

Review of neuroimaging studies related to pain modulation

Background and purpose: A noxious stimulus does not necessarily cause pain. Nociceptive signals arising from a noxious stimulus are subject to modulation via endogenous inhibitory and facilitatory mechanisms as they travel from the periphery to the dorsal horn or brainstem and on to higher brain sites. Research on the neural structures underlying endogenous pain modulation has largely been restricted to animal research due to the invasiveness of such studies (e.g., spinal cord transection, brain lesioning, brain site stimulation). Neuroimaging techniques (e.g., magnetoencephalography (MEG), positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)) provide non-invasive means to study neural structures in humans. The aim is to provide a narrative review of neuroimaging studies related to human pain control mechanisms.

Methods: The approach taken is to summarise specific pain modulation mechanisms within the somatosensory (diffuse noxious inhibitory controls, acupuncture, movement), affective (depression, anxiety, catastrophizing, stress) and cognitive (anticipation/placebo, attention/distraction, hypnosis)domains with emphasis on the contribution of neuroimaging studies.

Results and conclusions: Findings from imaging studies are complex reflecting activation or deactivation in numerous brain areas. Despite this, neuroimaging techniques have clarified supraspinal sites involved in a number of pain control mechanisms. The periaqueductal grey (PAG) is one area that has consistently been shown to be activated across the majority of pain mechanisms. Activity in the rostral ventromedial medulla known to relay descending modulation from the PAG, has also been observed both during acupuncture analgesia and anxiety-induced hyperalgesia. Other brain areas that appear to be involved in a number of mechanisms are the anterior cingulate cortex, prefrontal cortex, orbitofrontal cortex and nucleus accumbens, but their exact role is less clear.

Implications: Neuroimaging studies have provided essential information about the pain modulatory pathways under normal conditions, but much is still to be determined. Understanding the mechanisms of pain control is important for understanding the mechanisms that contribute to failed pain control in chronic pain. Applying fMRI outside the brain, such as in the trigeminal nucleus caudalis of the spinotrigeminal pathway and in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, and coupling brain activity with activity at these sites may help improve our understanding of the function of brain sites and shed light on functional connectivity in the pain pathway.

© 2011 Scandinavian Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Focused hypnotic analgesia: Local and remote effects

Suggestion for hypnotic analgesia aimed at a specific body area is termed "focused hypnotic analgesia". It is not clear, however, whether this analgesia is limited to a specific body location or spread all over the body. Focused hypnotic analgesia was studied, in response to ascending electrical stimuli, when analgesia and stimulation were applied to the same area (local), and when analgesia was applied to one location and stimulation was delivered to a different area (remote). The face or leg served alternately as the local or remote areas, and the effect was tested in 12 high-hypnotizable (HH) and 13 low-hypnotizable (LH) subjects. Hypnotic analgesia in the local site produced a significant pain reduction compared to the remote site in HH subjects (P<0.0001) but not in LH subjects (P=0.68). As stimuli increased in intensity the reduction in pain as a result of hypnosis was larger both in HH and LH subjects (P<0.0001). Nevertheless, significant analgesia occurred in the 3 highest intensities in the local and remote location of HH subjects, but only in 2 highest intensities in the local and 1 in the remote of LH subjects. We conclude that in HH subjects focused hypnotic analgesia is mostly confined to the area aimed at, but some spread of analgesia to remote areas cannot be dismissed all together. Alternatively, this "spread" of analgesia could be due to a placebo effect in the remote area. Focused hypnotic analgesia requires increased attention to the body area aimed at, unlike analgesia achieved by distraction of attention.

The lower limb flexion reflex in humans

The flexion or flexor reflex (FR) recorded in the lower limbs in humans (LLFR) is a widely investigated neurophysiological tool. It is a polysynaptic and multisegmental spinal response that produces a withdrawal of the stimulated limb and resembles (having several features in common) the hind-paw FR in animals. The FR, in both animals and humans, is mediated by a complex circuitry modulated at spinal and supraspinal level. At rest, the LLFR (usually obtained by stimulating the sural/tibial nerve and by recording from the biceps femoris/tibial anterior muscle) appears as a double burst composed of an early, inconstantly present component, called the RII reflex, and a late, larger and stable component, called the RIII reflex. Numerous studies have shown that the afferents mediating the RII reflex are conveyed by large-diameter, low-threshold, non-nociceptive A-beta fibers, and those mediating the RIII reflex by small-diameter, high-threshold nociceptive A-delta fibers. However, several afferents, including nociceptive and non-nociceptive fibers from skin and muscles, have been found to contribute to LLFR activation. Since the threshold of the RIII reflex has been shown to correspond to the pain threshold and the size of the reflex to be related to the level of pain perception, it has been suggested that the RIII reflex might constitute a useful tool to investigate pain processing at spinal and supraspinal level, pharmacological modulation and pathological pain conditions. As stated in EFNS guidelines, the RIII reflex is the most widely used of all the nociceptive reflexes, and appears to be the most reliable in the assessment of treatment efficacy. However, the RIII reflex use in the clinical evaluation of neuropathic pain is still limited. In addition to its nocifensive function, the LLFR seems to be linked to posture and locomotion. This may be explained by the fact that its neuronal circuitry, made up of a complex pool of interneurons, is interposed in motor control and, during movements, receives both peripheral afferents (flexion reflex afferents, FRAs) and descending commands, forming a multisensorial feedback mechanism and projecting the output to motoneurons. LLFR excitability, mediated by this complex circuitry, is finely modulated in a state- and phase-dependent manner, rather as we observe in the FR in animal models. Several studies have demonstrated that LLFR excitability may be influenced by numerous physiological conditions (menstrual cycle, stress, attention, sleep and so on) and pathological states (spinal lesions, spasticity, Wallenberg's syndrome, fibromyalgia, headaches and so on). Finally, the LLFR is modulated by several drugs and neurotransmitters. In summary, study of the LLFR in humans has proved to be an interesting functional window onto the spinal and supraspinal mechanisms of pain processing and onto the spinal neural control mechanisms operating during posture and locomotion.

Kinematic strategies for lowering of upper limbs during suggestions of heaviness: a real-simulator design

The aim of the experiment was to study possible differences between the kinematic strategies for the "involuntary" arm lowering of hypnotized highly susceptible subjects (H-Highs) and for the voluntary movement of non-hypnotizable simulators (Sims) during suggestions of arm heaviness (Part I). In addition, a comparison between awake susceptible subjects (W-Highs) and H-Highs was carried out to clarify the specific role of the hypnotic state and hypnotizability (Part II). Subjects' absorption and attentional/imagery capabilities were evaluated through neuropsychological tests. Their arm movements were monitored three-dimensionally at hand, wrist and elbow level through a Polhemus Fastrack system. A final interview collected self-reports concerning the perception of movement involuntariness. Neuropsychological tests showed better "absorption" and imagery capabilities in Highs. In the interview, H-Highs perceived a higher involvement in the task and greater involuntariness and difficulties in contrasting the arm lowering than the Sims. Kinematic analysis showed significant differences between H-Highs and Sims for arm displacements along the vertical axis and on the horizontal plane. In fact, the former lowered the left arm earlier and to a greater degree than the right arm; on the horizontal plane, a forearm flexion was observed for H-Highs on the right side. On comparing W-Highs and H-Highs, hypnosis appeared to magnify the waking motor strategies, but also to induce specific changes, mainly concerning the horizontal plane. These results cannot be interpreted on the basis of "role playing" and socio-cognitive factors. They are believed to be due to a balance between the effectiveness of the frontal executive control towards the selection of behaviors and movement automaticity, which is in line with the neo-dissociation theory of hypnosis.

Focused analgesia and generalized relaxation produce differential hypnotic analgesia in response to ascending stimulus intensity

This study was designed in order to examine the effects of different types of hypnotic suggestion on hypnotic analgesia. Generalized relaxation and focused analgesia were induced in seven high-hypnotizable (HH) and eight low-hypnotizable (LH) subjects. Subjects were not aware to which group they belonged. The two groups did not differ in their expectation rates to achieve analgesia under hypnosis. Pain intensity and unpleasantness were rated on visual analogue scales in response to painful electrical stimuli, delivered in random order in five ascending intensities. Both focused analgesia and generalized relaxation decreased pain intensity significantly (P < 0.01). However, stimulus-intensity response curves differed under the two hypnotic conditions. As stimulus intensity became higher pain reduction was enhanced under focused analgesia, while a constant reduction occurred under generalized relaxation. The interaction between hypnotic state and stimulus intensity was significant for focused analgesia (P < 0.05) but not for generalized relaxation (P > 0.07), difference became more pronounced when analyzed for HH subjects only (P < 0.002 for analgesia, P > 0.10 for relaxation). Pain reduction was significantly higher in HH than in LH subjects under focused analgesia (P < 0.02) but not under generalized relaxation (P > 0.5). We conclude that by utilizing two modes of hypnotic suggestions in response to ascending stimuli, we were able to discover two components of hypnotic analgesia. One shows a parallel shift in the stimulus-response function, has features similar to placebo and bears no clear relationship to hypnotic susceptibility. The other shows a slope change in the stimulus-response curve and has a positive relationship to hypnotic susceptibility.

Evidence for spinal cord hypersensitivity in chronic pain after whiplash injury and in fibromyalgia

Patients with chronic pain after whiplash injury and fibromyalgia patients display exaggerated pain after sensory stimulation. Because evident tissue damage is usually lacking, this exaggerated pain perception could be explained by hyperexcitability of the central nervous system. The nociceptive withdrawal reflex (a spinal reflex) may be used to study the excitability state of spinal cord neurons. We tested the hypothesis that patients with chronic whiplash pain and fibromyalgia display facilitated withdrawal reflex and therefore spinal cord hypersensitivity. Three groups were studied: whiplash (n=27), fibromyalgia (n=22) and healthy controls (n=29). Two types of transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the sural nerve were applied: single stimulus and five repeated stimuli at 2 Hz. Electromyography was recorded from the biceps femoris muscle. The main outcome measurement was the minimum current intensity eliciting a spinal reflex (reflex threshold). Reflex thresholds were significantly lower in the whiplash compared with the control group, after both single (P=0.024) and repeated (P=0.035) stimulation. The same was observed for the fibromyalgia group, after both stimulation modalities (P=0.001 and 0.046, respectively). We provide evidence for spinal cord hyperexcitability in patients with chronic pain after whiplash injury and in fibromyalgia patients. This can cause exaggerated pain following low intensity nociceptive or innocuous peripheral stimulation. Spinal hypersensitivity may explain, at least in part, pain in the absence of detectable tissue damage.