Neuropathic pain is accompanied by both positive and negative sensory signs. To explore the spectrum of sensory abnormalities, 1236 patients with a clinical diagnosis of neuropathic pain were assessed by quantitative sensory testing (QST) following the protocol of DFNS (German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain), using both thermal and mechanical nociceptive as well as non-nociceptive stimuli. Data distributions showed a systematic shift to hyperalgesia for nociceptive, and to hypoesthesia for non-nociceptive parameters. Across all parameters, 92% of the patients presented at least one abnormality. Thermosensory or mechanical hypoesthesia (up to 41%) was more frequent than hypoalgesia (up to 18% for mechanical stimuli). Mechanical hyperalgesias occurred more often (blunt pressure: 36%, pinprick: 29%) than thermal hyperalgesias (cold: 19%, heat: 24%), dynamic mechanical allodynia (20%), paradoxical heat sensations (18%) or enhanced wind-up (13%). Hyperesthesia was less than 5%. Every single sensory abnormality occurred in each neurological syndrome, but with different frequencies: thermal and mechanical hyperalgesias were most frequent in complex regional pain syndrome and peripheral nerve injury, allodynia in postherpetic neuralgia. In postherpetic neuralgia and in central pain, subgroups showed either mechanical hyperalgesia or mechanical hypoalgesia. The most frequent combinations of gain and loss were mixed thermal/mechanical loss without hyperalgesia (central pain and polyneuropathy), mixed loss with mechanical hyperalgesia in peripheral neuropathies, mechanical hyperalgesia without any loss in trigeminal neuralgia. Thus, somatosensory profiles with different combinations of loss and gain are shared across the major neuropathic pain syndromes. The characterization of underlying mechanisms will be needed to make a mechanism-based classification feasible.

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is an instrument to assess positive and negative sensory signs, helping to identify mechanisms underlying pathologic pain conditions. In this study, we evaluated the test-retest reliability (TR-R) and the interobserver reliability (IO-R) of QST in patients with sensory disturbances of different etiologies. In 4 centres, 60 patients (37 male and 23 female, 56.4±1.9years) with lesions or diseases of the somatosensory system were included. QST comprised 13 parameters including detection and pain thresholds for thermal and mechanical stimuli. QST was performed in the clinically most affected test area and a less or unaffected control area in a morning and an afternoon session on 2 consecutive days by examiner pairs (4 QSTs/patient). For both, TR-R and IO-R, there were high correlations (r=0.80-0.93) at the affected test area, except for wind-up ratio (TR-R: r=0.67; IO-R: r=0.56) and paradoxical heat sensations (TR-R: r=0.35; IO-R: r=0.44). Mean IO-R (r=0.83, 31% unexplained variance) was slightly lower than TR-R (r=0.86, 26% unexplained variance, P<.05); the difference in variance amounted to 5%. There were no differences between study centres. In a subgroup with an unaffected control area (n=43), reliabilities were significantly better in the test area (TR-R: r=0.86; IO-R: r=0.83) than in the control area (TR-R: r=0.79; IO-R: r=0.71, each P<.01), suggesting that disease-related systematic variance enhances reliability of QST. We conclude that standardized QST performed by trained examiners is a valuable diagnostic instrument with good test-retest and interobserver reliability within 2days. With standardized training, observer bias is much lower than random variance. Quantitative sensory testing performed by trained examiners is a valuable diagnostic instrument with good interobserver and test-retest reliability for use in patients with sensory disturbances of different etiologies to help identify mechanisms of neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain.

Age- and gender-matched reference values are essential for the clinical use of quantitative sensory testing (QST). To extend the standard test sites for QST-according to the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain-to the trunk, we collected QST profiles on the back in 162 healthy subjects. Sensory profiles for standard test sites were within normal interlaboratory differences. QST revealed lower sensitivity on the upper back than the hand, and higher sensitivity on the lower back than the foot, but no systematic differences between these trunk sites. Age effects were significant for most parameters. Females exhibited lower pressure pain thresholds (PPT) than males, which was the only significant gender difference. Values outside the 95% confidence interval of healthy subjects (considered abnormal) required temperature changes of >3.3-8.2 °C for thermal detection. For cold pain thresholds, confidence intervals extended mostly beyond safety cutoffs, hence only relative reference data (left-right differences, hand-trunk differences) were sufficiently sensitive. For mechanical detection and pain thresholds, left-right differences were 1.5-2.3 times more sensitive than absolute reference data. The most sensitive parameter was PPT, where already side-to-side differences >35% were abnormal. Compared to trunk reference data, patients with postherpetic neuralgia exhibited thermal and tactile deficits and dynamic mechanical allodynia, mostly without reduced mechanical pain thresholds. This pattern deviates from other types of neuropathic pain. QST reference data for the trunk will also be useful for patients with postthoracotomy pain or chronic back pain.

Pain patients often report distinct numbness of the painful skin although no structural peripheral or central nerve lesion is obvious. In this cross-sectional study we assessed the reduction of tactile function and studied underlying mechanisms in patients with chronic pain and in healthy participants exposed to phasic and tonic experimental nociceptive stimulation. Mechanical detection (MDT) and pain thresholds (MPT) were assessed in the painful area and the non-painful contralateral side in 10 patients with unilateral musculoskeletal pain. Additionally, 10 healthy participants were exposed to nociceptive stimulation applied to the volar forearms (capsaicin; electrical stimulation, twice each). Areas of tactile hypaesthesia and mechanical hyperalgesia were assessed. MDT and MPT were quantified adjacent to the stimulation site. Tactile hypaesthesia in pain patients and in experimental pain (MDT-z-scores: -0.66+/-0.30 and -0.42+/-0.15, respectively, both p<0.01) was paralleled by mechanical hyperalgesia (MPT-z-scores: +0.51+/-0.27, p<0.05; and +0.48+/-0.10, p<0.001). However, hypaesthesia and hyperalgesia were not correlated. Although 9 patients reported numbness, only 3 of them were able to delineate circumscript areas of tactile hypaesthesia. In experimental pain, the area of tactile hypaesthesia could be mapped in 31/40 experiments (78%). Irrespective of the mode of nociceptive stimulation (phasic vs. tonic) tactile hypaesthesia and hyperalgesia developed with a similar time course and disappeared within approximately 1 day. Hypaesthesia (numbness) often encountered in clinical pain can be reproduced by experimental nociceptive stimulation. The time course of effects suggests a mechanism involving central plasticity.

Our results indicate that warm and cold complex regional pain syndromes (CRPS) are associated with different clinical findings, beyond skin temperature changes. This might have implications for the understanding of CRPS pathophysiology.

No abstract

Neuropathic pain arises as a consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system and is characterised by a combination of positive and negative sensory symptoms. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) examines the sensory perception after application of different mechanical and thermal stimuli of controlled intensity and the function of both large (A-beta) and small (A-delta and C) nerve fibres, including the corresponding central pathways. QST can be used to determine detection, pain thresholds and stimulus-response curves and can thus detect both negative and positive sensory signs, the second ones not being assessed by other methods. Similarly to all other psychophysical tests QST requires standardised examination, instructions and data evaluation to receive valid and reliable results. Since normative data are available, QST can contribute also to the individual diagnosis of neuropathy, especially in the case of isolated small-fibre neuropathy, in contrast to the conventional electrophysiology which assesses only large myelinated fibres. For example, detection of early stages of subclinical neuropathy in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with diabetes mellitus can be helpful to optimise treatment and identify diabetic foot at risk of ulceration. QST assessed the individual's sensory profile and thus can be valuable to evaluate the underlying pain mechanisms which occur in different frequencies even in the same neuropathic pain syndromes. Furthermore, assessing the exact sensory phenotype by QST might be useful in the future to identify responders to certain treatments in accordance to the underlying pain mechanisms.

The perceived subjective visual vertical (SVV) is an important sign of a vestibular otolith tone imbalance in the roll plane. Previous studies suggested that unilateral pontomedullary brainstem lesions cause ipsiversive roll-tilt of SVV, whereas pontomesencephalic lesions cause contraversive roll-tilts of SVV. However, previous data were of limited quality and lacked a statistical approach. We therefore tested roll-tilt of the SVV in 79 human patients with acute unilateral brainstem lesions due to stroke by applying modern statistical lesionbehavior mapping analysis. Roll-tilt of the SVV was verified to be a brainstem sign, and for the first time it was confirmed statistically that lesions of the medial longitudinal fasciculus (MLF) and the medial vestibular nucleus are associated with ipsiversive tilt of the SVV, whereas contraversive tilts are associated with lesions affecting the rostral interstitial nucleus of the MLF, the superior cerebellar peduncle, the oculomotor nucleus, and the interstitial nucleus of Cajal. Thus, these structures constitute the anatomical pathway in the brainstem for verticality perception. Present data indicate that graviceptive otolith signals present a predominant role in the multisensory system of verticality perception.