The perception of pain is shaped by somatosensory information about threat. However, pain is also influenced by an individual’s expectations. Such expectations can result in clinically relevant modulations and abnormalities of pain. In the brain, sensory information, expectations (predictions), and discrepancies thereof (prediction errors) are signaled by an extended network of brain areas which generate evoked potentials and oscillatory responses at different latencies and frequencies. However, a comprehensive picture of how evoked and oscillatory brain responses signal sensory information, predictions, and prediction errors in the processing of pain is lacking so far. Here, we therefore applied brief painful stimuli to 48 healthy human participants and independently modulated sensory information (stimulus intensity) and expectations of pain intensity while measuring brain activity using electroencephalography (EEG). Pain ratings confirmed that pain intensity was shaped by both sensory information and expectations. In contrast, Bayesian analyses revealed that stimulus-induced EEG responses at different latencies (the N1, N2, and P2 components) and frequencies (alpha, beta, and gamma oscillations) were shaped by sensory information but not by expectations. Expectations, however, shaped alpha and beta oscillations before the painful stimuli. These findings indicate that commonly analyzed EEG responses to painful stimuli are more involved in signaling sensory information than in signaling expectations or mismatches of sensory information and expectations. Moreover, they indicate that the effects of expectations on pain are served by brain mechanisms which differ from those conveying effects of sensory information on pain.
Chronic pain is a highly prevalent and severely disabling disease that is associated with substantial changes of brain function. Such changes have mostly been observed when analyzing static measures of resting-state brain activity. However, brain activity varies over time, and it is increasingly recognized that the temporal dynamics of brain activity provide behaviorally relevant information in different neuropsychiatric disorders. Here, we therefore investigated whether the temporal dynamics of brain function are altered in chronic pain. To this end, we applied microstate analysis to eyes-open and eyes-closed resting-state electroencephalography data of 101 patients suffering from chronic pain and 88 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Microstate analysis describes electroencephalography activity as a sequence of a limited number of topographies termed microstates that remain stable for tens of milliseconds. Our results revealed that sequences of 5 microstates, labelled with the letters A to E, consistently described resting-state brain activity in both groups in the eyes-closed condition. Bayesian analysis of the temporal characteristics of microstates revealed that microstate D has a less predominant role in patients than in controls. As microstate D has previously been related to attentional networks and functions, these abnormalities might relate to dysfunctional attentional processes in chronic pain. Subgroup analyses replicated microstate D changes in patients with chronic back pain, while patients with chronic widespread pain did not show microstates alterations. Together, these findings add to the understanding of the pathophysiology of chronic pain and point to changes of brain dynamics specific to certain types of chronic pain.
Chronic pain is a major healthcare issue posing a large burden on individuals and society. Converging lines of evidence indicate that chronic pain is associated with substantial changes of brain structure and function. However, it remains unclear which neuronal measures relate to changes of clinical parameters over time and could thus monitor chronic pain and treatment responses. We therefore performed a longitudinal study in which we assessed clinical characteristics and resting-state electroencephalography data of 41 patients with chronic pain before and 6 months after interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy. We specifically assessed electroencephalography measures that have previously been shown to differ between patients with chronic pain and healthy people. These included the dominant peak frequency; the amplitudes of neuronal oscillations at theta, alpha, beta, and gamma frequencies; as well as graph theory-based measures of brain network organization. The results show that pain intensity, pain-related disability, and depression were significantly improved after interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy. Bayesian hypothesis testing indicated that these clinical changes were not related to changes of the dominant peak frequency or amplitudes of oscillations at any frequency band. Clinical changes were, however, associated with an increase in global network efficiency at theta frequencies. Thus, changes in chronic pain might be reflected by global network changes in the theta band. These longitudinal insights further the understanding of the brain mechanisms of chronic pain. Beyond, they might help to identify biomarkers for the monitoring of chronic pain.
Chronic pain is a major health care problem. A better mechanistic understanding and new treatment approaches are urgently needed. In the brain, pain has been associated with neural oscillations at alpha and gamma frequencies, which can be targeted using transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS). Thus, we investigated the potential of tACS to modulate pain and painrelated autonomic activity in an experimental model of chronic pain in 29 healthy participants. In 6 recording sessions, participants completed a tonic heat pain paradigm and simultaneously received tACS over prefrontal or somatosensory cortices at alpha or gamma frequencies or sham tACS. Concurrently, pain ratings and autonomic responses were collected. Using the present setup, tACS did not modulate pain or autonomic responses. Bayesian statistics confirmed a lack of tACS effects in most conditions. The only exception was alpha tACS over somatosensory cortex where evidence was inconclusive. Taken together, we did not find significant tACS effects on tonic experimental pain in healthy humans. Based on our present and previous findings, further studies might apply refined stimulation protocols targeting somatosensory alpha oscillations.Trial registration: The study protocol was pre-registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03805854). Perspective: Modulating brain oscillations is a promising approach for the treatment of pain. We therefore applied transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) to modulate experimental pain in healthy participants. However, tACS did not modulate pain, autonomic responses, or EEG oscillations. These findings help to shape future tACS studies for the treatment of pain.
Pain emerges from the integration of sensory information about threats and contextual information such as an individual’s expectations. However, how sensory and contextual effects on pain are served by the brain is not fully understood so far. To address this question, we applied brief painful stimuli to 40 healthy human participants and independently varied stimulus intensity and expectations. Concurrently, we recorded electroencephalography. We assessed local oscillatory brain activity and interregional functional connectivity in a network of six brain regions playing key roles in the processing of pain. We found that sensory information predominantly influenced local brain oscillations. In contrast, expectations exclusively influenced interregional connectivity. Specifically, expectations altered connectivity at alpha (8 to 12 hertz) frequencies from prefrontal to somatosensory cortex. Moreover, discrepancies between sensory information and expectations, i.e., prediction errors, influenced connectivity at gamma (60 to 100 hertz) frequencies. These findings reveal how fundamentally different brain mechanisms serve sensory and contextual effects on pain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.