Encoding of nociceptive thermal stimuli by diffuse noxious inhibitory controls in humans.

Laboratoire de Neurophysiologie, Faculté de Médecine Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France.
Journal of Neurophysiology (Impact Factor: 3.3). 12/1989; 62(5):1028-38.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT 1. It has previously been shown that, in normal humans, heterotopic painful thermal conditioning stimuli induce parallel increase in the thresholds of a spinal nociceptive flexion reflex (RIII reflex) and the concurrent sensation of pain elicited by electrical stimulation of the sural nerve. On the basis of analogous animal studies, we proposed that such phenomena could be related to diffuse noxious inhibitory controls (DNIC), which have been described in the rat. The present study, which was carried out on normal volunteer subjects, was particularly concerned with the extent and temporal characteristics of the depressive effects of DNIC triggered by painful thermal stimuli on RIII reflex activity. In addition, because it was possible that these depressive effects could have resulted from a direct postsynaptic inhibition of motoneurons, a second part of the study was aimed at determining whether or not the heterotopic noxious thermal stimuli also affected the excitability of alpha-motoneurons, as monitored by the monosynaptic Hoffmann reflex (H reflex) technique. 2. In the 11 subjects under study, application of moderate, nonnoxious temperatures (40-44 degree C) to the contralateral hand (via a thermoregulated and agitated waterbath) did not modify the RIII reflex nor the associated sensation of pain. By contrast noxious temperatures clearly depressed the RIII reflex and the concurrent sensation of pain, both during and after the conditioning procedure (CP), in a direct linear relationship to the temperature of the waterbath in the 45-47 degree C range; the maximal depressive effect was observed with the highest conditioning temperature. A significant relationship was also found between the extent of the RIII depression during the CP and that during a 10-min period of post-CP observation. 3. The depressive effects observed on both the RIII reflex and pain were not associated with clear change in autonomic functions. Respiration remained stable during the sessions, with no significant relationship between the temperatures of the waterbath and respiratory rate. Heart rate was slightly but significantly increased during the immersion of the hand in the 46 or 47 degree C waterbaths; this increase, however, ceased with the end of CP. 4. Application of thermal conditioning stimuli produced a slight but nonsignificant increase of the monosynaptic H reflex during the first minute of CP, no matter what was the temperature of the waterbath. However, there were no subsequent variations during the 6-min period of post-CP observation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Endogenous pain modulation has been studied with the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm with large differences in the magnitude of the CPM effect. We hypothesized that differences in CPM effects might be associated with differences in blood pressure responses to the conditioning stimulus when comparing the CPM effects using two different conditioning stimuli.MethodsA single-blind repeated-measures design with block-randomization was applied on 25 healthy male subjects. The test stimulus (TS; tonic heat pain for 120 s) was first presented alone, thereafter in parallel with a conditioning stimulus (CS). Conditioning stimuli were either a cold pressor test (CPT) or equally painful ischaemic muscle pain (ISC), both lasting 120 s. Finger blood pressure and heart rate were recorded continuously. Data were analysed in a linear mixed model framework with CS type (CPT or ISC) and conditioning (TS or TS + CS) as independent factors.ResultsAn inhibitory CPM effect was found for both types of conditioning (p < 0.001). The CPM effect was larger during CPT conditioning compared with ISC conditioning (p = 0.001). No association with the concomitant cardiovascular response (blood pressure and heart rate) was found (p > 0.34).Conclusion Cold pressor pain CS induces larger CPM effects than ischaemic pain CS. The larger CPM effect is, however, not associated with a larger blood pressure response. Other factors related to the CS should be investigated to understand why different CS modalities give different CPM effects.
    European journal of pain (London, England) 04/2014; · 3.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Pain 09/1989; 38(2):231-4. · 5.64 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Heterotopic noxious counterstimulation (HNCS) by the application of a sustained noxious stimulus has been shown to inhibit nociceptive processes and decrease pain induced by a competing noxious stimulus. However, it is still not clear how attentional processes contribute to these effects. The main objective of this study was to compare the analgesic effects of HNCS in 2 sessions during which top-down attention was manipulated. Acute shock pain and the nociceptive flexion reflex were evoked by transcutaneous electrical stimulations of the right sural nerve in 4 blocks (15 stimuli/block): baseline, heterotopic innocuous counterstimulation (HICS), HNCS, and recovery. Counterstimulation was applied on the left upper limb with a thermode (HICS) or a cold pack (HNCS). Attention was manipulated between sessions by instructing participants to focus their attention on shock pain or counterstimulation. Shock pain ratings decreased significantly during counterstimulation (P<.001) with stronger effects of HNCS vs HICS in both sessions (P<.01). Furthermore, shock pain inhibition during HNCS relative to baseline was stronger with attention focusing on counterstimulation compared to attention focusing on shocks (P = .015). However, the relative decrease in pain ratings during HNCS vs HICS was not significantly affected by the direction of attention (P = .7). As for spinal nociceptive processes, nociceptive flexion reflex amplitude was significantly decreased during counterstimulation (P<.001) with larger reductions during HNCS compared to HICS (P = .03). However, these effects were not altered by attention (P = .35). Together, these results demonstrate that top-down attention and HNCS produce additive analgesic effects. However, attentional modulation of HNCS analgesia seems to depend on supraspinal processes.
    Pain 06/2012; 153(8):1755-62. · 5.64 Impact Factor


Available from
Aug 17, 2014