Symptom profiles in the painDETECT Questionnaire in patients with peripheral neuropathic pain stratified according to sensory loss in quantitative sensory testing

Improving neuropathic pain treatment - by rigorous stratification from bench to bedside

Chronic pain is a constantly recurring and persistent illness, presenting a formidable healthcare challenge for patients and physicians alike. Current first-line analgesics offer only low-modest efficacy when averaged across populations, further contributing to this debilitating disease burden. Moreover, many recent trials for novel analgesics have not met primary efficacy endpoints, which is particularly striking considering the pharmacological advances have provided a range of highly relevant new drug targets. Heterogeneity within chronic pain cohorts is increasingly understood to play a critical role in these failures of treatment and drug discovery, with some patients deriving substantial benefits from a given intervention while it has little-to-no effect on others. As such, current treatment failures may not result from a true lack of efficacy, but rather a failure to target individuals whose pain is driven by mechanisms which it therapeutically modulates. This necessitates a move towards phenotypical stratification of patients to delineate responders and non-responders in a mechanistically driven manner. In this article, we outline a bench-to-bedside roadmap for this transition to mechanistically informed personalised pain medicine. We emphasise how the successful identification of novel analgesics is dependent on rigorous experimental design as well as the validity of models and translatability of outcome measures between the animal model and patients. Subsequently, we discuss general and specific aspects of human trial design to address heterogeneity in patient populations to increase the chance of identifying effective analgesics. Finally, we show how stratification approaches can be brought into clinical routine to the benefit of patients.

Quantitative Sensory Testing in Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVES

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) has been used for decades to study sensory abnormalities in multiple conditions in which the somatosensory system is compromised, including pain. It is commonly used in pharmacologic studies on chronic pain but less so in conjunction with neuromodulation. This review aims to assess the utility of QST in spinal cord stimulation (SCS) protocols.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this narrative review, we searched PubMed for records of studies in which sensory testing has been performed as part of a clinical study on SCS from 1975 onward until October 2023. We focused on studies in which QST has been used to explore the effect of SCS on neuropathic, neuropathic-like, or mixed pain.

RESULTS

Our search identified 22 useful studies, all small and exploratory, using heterogeneous methods. Four studies used the full battery of validated German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain QST. There is emerging evidence that assessment dynamic mechanical allodynia (eight studies), and mechanical/thermal temporal summation of pain (eight studies) may have a role in quantifying the response to various SCS waveforms. There also were sporadic reports of improvement of sensory deficits in a proportion of patients with neuropathic pain that warrant further study.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend the adoption of QST into future clinical research protocols, using either the full QST protocol or a less time-demanding short-form QST.

Cold-evoked potentials in Fabry disease and polyneuropathy

Background

Fabry disease (FD) causes cold-evoked pain and impaired cold perception through small fiber damage, which also occurs in polyneuropathies (PNP) of other origins. The integrity of thinly myelinated fibers and the spinothalamic tract is assessable by cold-evoked potentials (CEPs). In this study, we aimed to assess the clinical value of CEP by investigating its associations with pain, autonomic measures, sensory loss, and neuropathic signs.

Methods

CEPs were examined at the hand and foot dorsum of patients with FD (n = 16) and PNP (n = 21) and healthy controls (n = 23). Sensory phenotyping was performed using quantitative sensory testing (QST). The painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ), FabryScan, and measures for the autonomic nervous system were applied. Group comparisons and correlation analyses were performed.

Results

CEPs of 87.5% of the FD and 85.7% of the PNP patients were eligible for statistical analysis. In all patients combined, CEP data correlated significantly with cold detection loss, PDQ items, pain, and autonomic measures. Abnormal CEP latency in FD patients was associated with an abnormal heart frequency variability item (r = -0.684; adjusted p = 0.04). In PNP patients, CEP latency correlated significantly with PDQ items, and CEP amplitude correlated with autonomic measures (r = 0.688, adjusted p = 0.008; r = 0.619, adjusted p = 0.024). Furthermore, mechanical pain thresholds differed significantly between FD (gain range) and PNP patients (loss range) (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Abnormal CEPs were associated with current pain, neuropathic signs and symptoms, and an abnormal function of the autonomic nervous system. The latter has not been mirrored by QST parameters. Therefore, CEPs appear to deliver a wider spectrum of information on the sensory nervous system than QST alone.

Paradoxical heat sensation as a manifestation of thermal hypesthesia: a study of 1090 patients with lesions of the somatosensory system

ABSTRACT

Paradoxical heat sensation (PHS) is the perception of warmth when the skin is cooled. Paradoxical heat sensation rarely occurs in healthy individuals but more frequently in patients suffering from lesions or disease of the peripheral or central nervous system. To further understand mechanisms and epidemiology of PHS, we evaluated the occurrence of PHS in relation to disease aetiology, pain levels, quantitative sensory testing parameters, and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) items in patients with nervous system lesions. Data of 1090 patients, including NPSI scores from 404 patients, were included in the analysis. We tested 11 quantitative sensory testing parameters for thermal and mechanical detection and pain thresholds, and 10 NPSI items in a multivariate generalised linear model with PHS, aetiology, and pain (yes or no) as fixed effects. In total, 30% of the neuropathic patients reported PHS in contrast to 2% of healthy individuals. The frequency of PHS was not linked to the presence or intensity of pain. Paradoxical heat sensation was more frequent in patients living with polyneuropathy compared with central or unilateral peripheral nerve lesions. Patients who reported PHS demonstrated significantly lower sensitivity to thermal perception, with lower sensitivity to normally painful heat and cold stimuli. Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory scores were lower for burning and electric shock-like pain quality for patients with PHS. Our findings suggest that PHS is associated with loss of small thermosensory fibre function normally involved in cold and warm perception. Clinically, presence of PHS could help screening for loss of small fibre function as it is straightforward to measure or self-reported by patients.

Subgrouping patients with zoster-associated pain according to sensory symptom profiles: A cluster analysis

Background and goal of study

Patients with zoster-associated pain exhibit a variety of sensory symptoms and forms of pain and complain of different pain patterns. The purpose of this study is to subgroup patients with zoster-associated pain who visited a hospital using painDETECT sensory symptom scores, analyze their respective characteristics and pain-related data, and compare similarities and differences among the groups.

Materials and methods

The characteristics of 1,050 patients complaining of zoster-associated pain and pain-related data were reviewed retrospectively. To identify subgroups of patients with zoster-associated pain according to sensory symptom profiles, a hierarchical cluster analysis was performed based on the responses to a painDETECT questionnaire. Demographics and pain-related data were compared among all subgroups.

Results and discussion

Patients with zoster-associated pain were classified into 5 subgroups according to the distribution of sensory profiles, with each subgroup exhibiting distinct differences in the expression of sensory symptoms. Patients in cluster 1 complained of burning sensations, allodynia, and thermal sensitivity, but felt numbness less strongly. Cluster 2 and 3 patients complained of burning sensations and electric shock-like pain, respectively. Cluster 4 patients complained of most sensory symptoms at similar intensities and reported relatively strong prickling pain. Cluster 5 patients suffered from both burning and shock-like pains. Patient ages and the prevalence of cardiovascular disease were significantly lower in cluster 1. Patients in clusters 1 and 4 reported longer pain duration compared with those in clusters 2 and 3. However, no significant differences were found with respect to sex, body mass index, diabetes mellitus, mental health problems, and sleep disturbance. Pain scores, distribution of dermatomes and gabapentinoid use were also similar among the groups.

Conclusions

Five different subgroups of patients with zoster-associated pain were identified on the basis of sensory symptoms. A subgroup of younger patients with longer pain duration showed specific and distinct symptoms, such as burning sensations and allodynia. Unlike patients with acute or subacute pain, patients with chronic pain were associated with diverse sensory symptom profiles.

Symptom descriptors and patterns in lumbar radicular pain caused by disc herniation: a 1-year longitudinal cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study was to explore the diversity, quality, severity and distribution of symptoms in patients with radicular pain and a lumbar disc herniation.

DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort study.

SETTING

Hospital-based back clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety patients referred to secondary healthcare with (a) low back-related leg pain, (b) age between 18 and 65 years and (c) MRI confirmed lumbar disc herniation at a relevant side and level.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Neuropathic pain symptoms were assessed using the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire-2 (SF-MPQ-2) and the painDETECT Questionnaire. In a subsample classified with neuropathic pain, in-depth interviews were performed, and symptomatic areas were drawn on standardised body charts.

RESULTS

At baseline, the most frequently used painDETECT symptom descriptor was numbness sensation, reported by 94%, followed by sudden pain attacks and tingling or prickling. The mean (SD) SF-MPQ-2 score (0-10) for aching pain was 5.9 (2.8); numbness 4.3 (3.3); tingling 4.0 (3.4); burning 2.6 (3.1); pain caused by light touch 1.5 (2.6). Leg pain was rated as extremely bothersome by 73%, numbness and tingling by 38%, weakness by 24% and back pain by 17%. In the subsample (n=52), deep-lying pain and non-painful abnormal sensations were frequent, at 71% and 85%. Drawings demonstrated substantial overlap between symptoms from compromised L5 and the S1 nerve roots. Painful and non-painful symptoms improved at approximately the same rate. At the 1-year follow-up, 45% (14/31) of patients who had received disc surgery, and 34% (18/53) of those who had received conservative treatment reported no bothersome back pain, leg pain, numbness/tingling or weakness.

CONCLUSION

Patients reported several highly bothersome symptoms, but not all are described as painful. The overall symptom profile of lumbar disc-related radicular pain differs from other neuropathic pain conditions with limited allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia. Symptomatic areas for the L5 and S1 nerve roots have a large overlap.

Dissecting central post-stroke pain: a controlled symptom-psychophysical characterization

Central post-stroke pain affects up to 12% of stroke survivors and is notoriously refractory to treatment. However, stroke patients often suffer from other types of pain of non-neuropathic nature (musculoskeletal, inflammatory, complex regional) and no head-to-head comparison of their respective clinical and somatosensory profiles has been performed so far. We compared 39 patients with definite central neuropathic post-stroke pain with two matched control groups: 32 patients with exclusively non-neuropathic pain developed after stroke and 31 stroke patients not complaining of pain. Patients underwent deep phenotyping via a comprehensive assessment including clinical exam, questionnaires and quantitative sensory testing to dissect central post-stroke pain from chronic pain in general and stroke. While central post-stroke pain was mostly located in the face and limbs, non-neuropathic pain was predominantly axial and located in neck, shoulders and knees (P < 0.05). Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory clusters burning (82.1%, n = 32, P < 0.001), tingling (66.7%, n = 26, P < 0.001) and evoked by cold (64.1%, n = 25, P < 0.001) occurred more frequently in central post-stroke pain. Hyperpathia, thermal and mechanical allodynia also occurred more commonly in this group (P < 0.001), which also presented higher levels of deafferentation (P < 0.012) with more asymmetric cold and warm detection thresholds compared with controls. In particular, cold hypoesthesia (considered when the threshold of the affected side was <41% of the contralateral threshold) odds ratio (OR) was 12 (95% CI: 3.8-41.6) for neuropathic pain. Additionally, cold detection threshold/warm detection threshold ratio correlated with the presence of neuropathic pain (ρ = -0.4, P < 0.001). Correlations were found between specific neuropathic pain symptom clusters and quantitative sensory testing: paroxysmal pain with cold (ρ = -0.4; P = 0.008) and heat pain thresholds (ρ = 0.5; P = 0.003), burning pain with mechanical detection (ρ = -0.4; P = 0.015) and mechanical pain thresholds (ρ = -0.4, P < 0.013), evoked pain with mechanical pain threshold (ρ = -0.3; P = 0.047). Logistic regression showed that the combination of cold hypoesthesia on quantitative sensory testing, the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, and the allodynia intensity on bedside examination explained 77% of the occurrence of neuropathic pain. These findings provide insights into the clinical-psychophysics relationships in central post-stroke pain and may assist more precise distinction of neuropathic from non-neuropathic post-stroke pain in clinical practice and in future trials.

Bibliometric and visualized analysis of Neuropathic pain based on Web of Science and CiteSpace over the last 20 years

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this bibliometric analysis was to explore disciplinary hotspots and collaborative networks in research on neuropathic pain (NPP) research in the past 20 years.

METHODS

The articles related to NPP were obtained from Web of Science database. Global publications on neuropathic pain were analyzed in terms of different aspects such as number of papers, citation rates, authors, institutions, countries/regions, journals, and funding, as well as relevant partnerships and topic hotspots RESULTS: From 2001 to 2020, 6905 articles related to NPP research were published worldwide. The number of publications had increased over the last 20 years continually. Pain was the most productive and the most frequently co-cited journal. Baron R was the most productive and influential author. The most productive country and institution were USA and Harvard University respectively. Researchers and institutions from the USA, Japan and China were the core research forces. There was a broad and close cooperation in the field worldwide. The top authors and top institutions had collaborated relatively closely with others.

CONCLUSIONS

The research of NPP is a well-developed and prospective field of medical study. Pain, European Journal of Pain, and Molecular Pain show more interested in this field. The USA, Harvard University, and Ralf Baron were the top country, institution, and author, respectively. Global research collaboration is extensive. Top institutions and authors had cooperation.

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

PURPOSE

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Bedside testing for precision pain medicine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years, the identification of therapy responders has become an increasing focus of pain research. On the basis of laboratory quantitative sensory testing, subgroups of patients were identified, which have been shown to predict treatment response. However, the high cost and time expenditure limits the use of these lab-QST protocols in clinical practice and large clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently, different bedside testing protocols were developed as easy-to-use alternative for lab-QST. In addition, patients can be subgrouped based on their symptoms by use of patient-reported outcome measures. First results suggest that these approaches can be used to stratify patients into pathophysiological-plausible subgroups predictive for treatment response.

SUMMARY

This review presents recently developed bedside approaches that can be implemented as stratification tools in future clinical trials to realize individualized pain medicine. Being complementary rather than replaceable, future studies should combine questionnaires and sensory testing and apply them prospectively in large clinical trials.

No pain, still gain (of function): the relation between sensory profiles and the presence or absence of self-reported pain in a large multicenter cohort of patients with neuropathy

ABSTRACT

The pathophysiology of pain in neuropathy is complex and may be linked to sensory phenotypes. Quantitative sensory testing, a standardized method to evaluate sensory profiles in response to defined stimuli, assesses functional integrity of small and large nerve fiber afferents and central somatosensory pathways. It has revealed detailed insights into mechanisms of neuropathy, yet it remains unclear if pain directly affects sensory profiles. The main objective of this study was to investigate sensory profiles in patients with various neuropathic conditions, including polyneuropathy, mononeuropathy, and lesions to the central nervous system, in relation to self-reported presence or absence of pain and pain sensitivity using the Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire. A total of 443 patients (332 painful and 111 painless) and 112 healthy participants were investigated. Overall, loss of sensation was equally prevalent in patients with and without spontaneous pain. Pain thresholds were equally lowered in both patient groups, demonstrating that hyperalgesia and allodynia are just as present in patients not reporting any pain. Remarkably, this was similar for dynamic mechanical allodynia. Hypoalgesia was more pronounced in painful polyneuropathy, whereas hyperalgesia was more frequent in painful mononeuropathy (compared with painless conditions). Self-reported pain sensitivity was significantly higher in painful than in painless neuropathic conditions. Our results reveal the presence of hyperalgesia and allodynia in patients with central and peripheral lesions of the somatosensory system not reporting spontaneous pain. This shows that symptoms and signs of hypersensitivity may not necessarily coincide and that painful and painless neuropathic conditions may mechanistically blend into one another.

Can self-reported pain characteristics and bedside test be used for the assessment of pain mechanisms? An analysis of results of neuropathic pain questionnaires and quantitative sensory testing

Hyperalgesia and allodynia are frequent in neuropathic pain. Some pain questionnaires such as the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) and the Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS) include self-assessment or bedside testing of hyperalgesia/allodynia. The aim of this study was to determine to what extent LANSS and NPS data are congruent with findings on quantitative sensory testing (QST). Self-reported presence of dynamic mechanical allodynia (DMA) and descriptors of hot, cold, or deep ongoing pain (the NPS and LANSS) as well as bedside findings of mechanical allodynia (LANSS) were compared with signs of DMA and thermal hyperalgesia on QST in 617 patients with neuropathic pain. Self-reported abnormal skin sensitivity (LANSS) showed a moderate concordance with DMA during bedside test (67.9%, κ = 0.391) or QST (52.8%, κ = 0.165). Receiver operating curve analysis for self-reported DMA yielded similar area-under-the-curve values for the LANSS (0.65, confidence interval: 0.59%-0.97%) and NPS (0.71, confidence interval: 0.66%-0.75%) with high sensitivity but low specificity. Self-reported deep pain intensity was higher in patients with blunt pressure hyperalgesia, but not in patients with DMA or thermal hyperalgesia. No correlations were observed between self-reported hot or cold pain quality and thermal hyperalgesia on QST. Self-reported abnormal skin sensitivity has a high sensitivity to identify patients with DMA, but its low specificity indicates that many patients mean something other than DMA when reporting this symptom. Self-reported deep pain is related to deep-tissue hypersensitivity, but thermal qualities of ongoing pain are not related to thermal hyperalgesia. Questionnaires mostly evaluate the ongoing pain experience, whereas QST mirrors sensory functions. Therefore, both methods are complementary for pain assessment.

Neuropathic Pain: From Mechanisms to Treatment

Neuropathic pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system is a common chronic pain condition with major impact on quality of life. Examples include trigeminal neuralgia, painful polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, and central poststroke pain. Most patients complain of an ongoing or intermittent spontaneous pain of, for example, burning, pricking, squeezing quality, which may be accompanied by evoked pain, particular to light touch and cold. Ectopic activity in, for example, nerve-end neuroma, compressed nerves or nerve roots, dorsal root ganglia, and the thalamus may in different conditions underlie the spontaneous pain. Evoked pain may spread to neighboring areas, and the underlying pathophysiology involves peripheral and central sensitization. Maladaptive structural changes and a number of cell-cell interactions and molecular signaling underlie the sensitization of nociceptive pathways. These include alteration in ion channels, activation of immune cells, glial-derived mediators, and epigenetic regulation. The major classes of therapeutics include drugs acting on α₂δ subunits of calcium channels, sodium channels, and descending modulatory inhibitory pathways.

Pain thresholds and intensities of CRPS type I and neuropathic pain in respect to sex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Healthy women have generally been found to have increased experimental pain perception and chronic pain has a higher prevalence in female as compared to male patients. However, no study has investigated whether pain intensity and pain perception thresholds are distinct or similar between sexes within various chronic pain entities. We investigated whether average pain intensities and pain thresholds assessed using quantitative sensory testing (QST) differed between women and men suffering from three distinct chronic pain conditions: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS type I), peripheral nerve injury (PNI) or polyneuropathy (PNP), as compared to paired healthy volunteers.

METHODS

QST data of 1,252 patients (669 female, 583 male) with PNI (n = 342), PNP (n = 571) or CRPS (n = 339), and average pain intensity reports from previously published studies were included. Absolute and z-values (adjusted for age and body region) of cold, heat, pressure (PPT) and pinprick pain thresholds were compared in generalized linear models with aetiology, duration of underlying pain disease and average pain intensity as fixed effects.

RESULTS

Average pain intensity during the past four weeks did not differ between women and men, in both mean and range. In women absolute pain thresholds for cold, heat and pinprick were lower than in males across all diagnoses (p < .05). However, after z-transformation these differences disappeared except for PPT in CRPS (p = .001).

DISCUSSION

Pain thresholds in patients show only minor sex differences. However, these differences mimic those observed in healthy subjects and do not seem to be linked to specific pathophysiological processes.

SIGNIFICANCE

Female healthy participants and female patients with neuropathic pain conditions or CRPS I report lower pain thresholds compared to males, but pain intensity is similar and there is no sex difference in the extent to which the thresholds are altered in neuropathic pain or CRPS. Thus, the sex differences observed in various chronic pain conditions mimic those obtained in healthy participants, indicating that these differences are not linked to specific pathophysiological processes and are of minor clinical relevance.

Sensory neuropathy and nociception in rodent models of Parkinson's disease

Parkinson's disease (PD) often manifests with prodromal pain and sensory losses whose etiologies are not well understood. Multiple genetic and toxicity-based rodent models of PD partly recapitulate the histopathology and motor function deficits. Although far less studied, there is some evidence that rodents, similar to humans, develop sensory manifestations of the disease, which may precede motor disturbances and help to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of PD-associated pain at the molecular and neuron circuit levels. The present Review summarizes nociception and other sensory functions in frequently used rodent PD models within the context of the complex phenotypes. In terms of mechanisms, it appears that the acute loss of dopaminergic neurons in systemic toxicity models (MPTP, rotenone) primarily causes nociceptive hyperexcitability, presumably owing to a loss of inhibitory control, whereas genetic models primarily result in a progressive loss of heat perception, reflecting sensory fiber neuropathies. At the molecular level, neither α-synuclein deposits alone nor failure of mitophagy alone appear to be strong enough to result in axonal or synaptic pathology of nociceptive neurons that manifest at the behavioral level, and peripheral sensory loss may mask central ‘pain’ in behavioral tests. Hence, allostatic combinations or additional challenges and novel behavioral assessments are needed to better evaluate PD-associated sensory neuropathies and pain in rodents.

Summary: Rodent models of Parkinson's disease partially develop prodromal somatosensory and olfactory dysfunctions reminiscent of sensory neuropathies in patients and reveal mechanistic insight, but data are incomplete and fragmented.

Sensory profiles are comparable in patients with distal and proximal entrapment neuropathies, while the pain experience differs

OBJECTIVE

Distal and proximal entrapment neuropathies such as carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and cervical radiculopathy (CR) share similar etiologies. Experimental models suggest that, despite comparable etiology, pathomechanisms associated with injuries of the peripheral and central axon branches are distinct. This study therefore compared self-reported and elicited sensory profiles in patients with distal and proximal entrapment neuropathies.

METHODS

Patients with electrodiagnostically confirmed CTS (n = 103) and patients with CR (n = 23) were included in this study. A group of healthy participants served as controls (n = 39). Symptoms and sensory profiles were evaluated using quantitative sensory testing (QST) and a self-reported neuropathic pain questionnaire (painDETECT).

RESULTS

Both patient groups were characterized by a loss of function in thermal and mechanical detection in the main pain area and dermatome compared to healthy reference data (p < .001). There was no significant difference between patients with CTS and CR in pain and detection thresholds except for reduced vibration sense in the main pain area (p < .001) and reduced pressure pain sensitivity in the dermatome in patients with CR (p < .001). However, patients with CR reported higher pain intensities (p = .008), more severe pain attacks (p = .009) and evoked pain by light pressure (p = .002) compared to patients with CTS.

CONCLUSION

While QST profiles were similar between patients with CTS and CR, self-reported pain profiles differed and may suggest distinct underlying mechanisms in these patient cohorts.

Pressure Pain Phenotypes in Women Before Breast Cancer Treatment

OBJECTIVES

To explore associations between quantitative sensory testing (QST) and pretreatment pain, physical, and psychological characteristics in women with breast cancer.

SAMPLE & SETTING

41 women with treatment-naive stage 0-III breast cancer at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center in Ann Arbor.

METHODS & VARIABLES

Participants completed self-report surveys and QST within the month before breast surgery. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were measured bilaterally at each trapezius with a manual QST algometer. PPT values were split, yielding low, moderate, and high pain sensitivity subgroups. Subgroup self-reported characteristics were compared using Spearman's correlation, chi-square, and one-way analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Lower PPT (higher sensitivity) was associated with higher levels of pain interference and maladaptive pain cognitions. The high-sensitivity group reported higher pain severities, interference, and catastrophizing and lower belief in internal locus of pain control than the low-sensitivity group.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Individualized interventions for maladaptive pain cognitions before surgery may reduce pain sensitivity and the severity of chronic pain developed after surgery.

Sensory symptom profiles differ between trigeminal and thoracolumbar postherpetic neuralgia

Introduction

Animal experimental evidence suggests that mechanisms of pain generation and response to treatment differ between neuropathic pain in the cephalic and the extracephalic innervation territories.

Objectives

The objective of the study was to examine whether in humans an identical peripheral painful neuropathy is associated with different pain qualities and sensory abnormalities in the face as compared with the thoracic region.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed epidemiological and clinical data of 639 patients with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) in the face and at the trunk who were collected within a cross-sectional cohort survey and compared the respective sensory symptom profiles captured with the painDETECT questionnaire.

Results

Two hundred twenty-four patients suffered from trigeminal PHN and 415 from thoracolumbar PHN. There were no significant differences in sex-ratio, age, body mass index, and pain duration. Patients with trigeminal PHN were more often severely depressed. Anxiety and sleep scores were not different. The average pain intensity was slightly higher in thoracolumbar PHN than trigeminal PHN (visual analogue scale 5.0 vs 4.6). Postherpetic neuralgia in the thoracolumbar region showed significantly more intense burning sensations, allodynia, painful attacks, and significantly less prickling and numbness than PHN in the face.

Conclusions

The differences in sensory symptom profiles between facial PHN and truncal PHN might be associated with different pathophysiological mechanisms and different treatment response. Drugs that primarily act on sensitization processes in the peripheral nociceptive system may work better in thoracolumbar PHN than in trigeminal PHN. If new medications are tested in patients with PHN, it would therefore be of interest to include an analysis of the treatment results in regard to subgroups based on the localisation of pain in patients with PHN.

Assessment and manifestation of central sensitisation across different chronic pain conditions

Different neuroplastic processes can occur along the nociceptive pathways and may be important in the transition from acute to chronic pain and for diagnosis and development of optimal management strategies. The neuroplastic processes may result in gain (sensitisation) or loss (desensitisation) of function in relation to the incoming nociceptive signals. Such processes play important roles in chronic pain, and although the clinical manifestations differ across condition processes, they share some common mechanistic features. The fundamental understanding and quantitative assessment of particularly some of the central sensitisation mechanisms can be translated from preclinical studies into the clinic. The clinical perspectives are implementation of such novel information into diagnostics, mechanistic phenotyping, prevention, personalised treatment, and drug development. The aims of this paper are to introduce and discuss (1) some common fundamental central pain mechanisms, (2) how they may translate into the clinical signs and symptoms across different chronic pain conditions, (3) how to evaluate gain and loss of function using quantitative pain assessment tools, and (4) the implications for optimising prevention and management of pain. The chronic pain conditions selected for the paper are neuropathic pain in general, musculoskeletal pain (chronic low back pain and osteoarthritic pain in particular), and visceral pain (irritable bowel syndrome in particular). The translational mechanisms addressed are local and widespread sensitisation, central summation, and descending pain modulation.

Significance

Central sensitisation is an important manifestation involved in many different chronic pain conditions. Central sensitisation can be different to assess and evaluate as the manifestations vary from pain condition to pain condition. Understanding central sensitisation may promote better profiling and diagnosis of pain patients and development of new regimes for mechanism based therapy. Some of the mechanisms underlying central sensitisation can be translated from animals to humans providing new options in development of therapies and profiling drugs under development.

Usefulness of laser-evoked potentials and quantitative sensory testing in the diagnosis of neuropathic spinal cord injury pain: a multiple case study

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the contribution of laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) and quantitative sensory testing (QST) to the diagnosis of neuropathic pain in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) and inconclusive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings.

SETTING

A multidisciplinary pain center.

METHODS

QST (DFNS protocol) and Tm-YAG-laser stimulation of the skin were applied within the pain site corresponding with dermatomes of altered sensation. Available MRI scans were reviewed.

RESULTS

Thirteen individuals (50±16 years) with SCI were examined. In four cases with no detectable neural lesion on MRI, all QST but three LEP were abnormal. In four patients with poorly defined spinal lesion on MRI, all QST but three LEP only were abnormal. In four cases where pain was not matching adequately with MRI lesions, all patients had abnormal LEP and QST. In one patient showing a spinal cord atrophy, LEP was normal but QST was abnormal. Findings supported the diagnoses at-level (n=5) and below-level (n=8) SCI pain. Spinothalamic tract function assessed by LEP was normal in three cases, but QST was abnormal in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

As QST is a psychophysical examination depending on patient cooperation, we suggest that the combination of QST and LEP might be a valuable diagnostic tool to detect lesions of the somatosensory system in a subgroup of patients with neuropathic spinal cord injury pain and inconclusive MRI findings.