The aim of this study was to determine the reliability of the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm assessed by an objective electrophysiological method, the nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR), and psychophysical measures, using hypothetical sample sizes for future studies as analytical goals. Thirty-four healthy volunteers participated in two identical experimental sessions, separated by 1 to 3 weeks. In each session, the cold pressor test (CPT) was used to induce CPM, and the NWR thresholds, electrical pain detection thresholds and pain intensity ratings after suprathreshold electrical stimulation were assessed before and during CPT. CPM was consistently detected by all methods, and the electrophysiological measures did not introduce additional variation to the assessment. In particular, 99% of the trials resulted in higher NWR thresholds during CPT, with an average increase of 3.4 mA (p<0.001). Similarly, 96% of the trials resulted in higher electrical pain detection thresholds during CPT, with an average increase of 2.2 mA (p<0.001). Pain intensity ratings after suprathreshold electrical stimulation were reduced during CPT in 84% of the trials, displaying an average decrease of 1.5 points in a numeric rating scale (p<0.001). Under these experimental conditions, CPM reliability was acceptable for all assessment methods in terms of sample sizes for potential experiments. The presented results are encouraging with regards to the use of the CPM as an assessment tool in experimental and clinical pain.Trial Registration:Clinical Trials.gov NCT01636440

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to assess whether ultra-fast acquisition SPECT/CT (UF-SPECT/CT) can replace standard SPECT/CT (std-SPECT/CT) as “add-on” to whole-body bone scintigraphy (WB-BS) for the investigation of bone metastases.Consecutive cancer patients referred for WB-BS who underwent SPECT/CT in addition to WB-BS were included. Std-SPECT, UF-SPECT, and low-dose CT were performed (std-SPECT: matrix 128 × 128, zoom factor 1, 20 s/view, 32 views; UF-SPECT: identical parameters except for 10 s/view and 16 views, reducing the acquisition time from 11 to 3 min). A consensus diagnosis was reached by two observers for each set of images (WB-BS + standard SPECT/CT or WB-BS + UF-SPECT/CT) using a three-category evaluation scale: M0: no bone metastases; M1: bone metastases; and Me: equivocal findings.ResultsAmong the 104 included patients, most presented with prostate cancer (n = 71) or breast cancer (n = 28). Using WB-BS + std-SPECT/CT, 71 (68%) patients were classified as M0, 19 (18%) as M1, and 14 (14%) as Me. Excellent agreement was observed between WB-BS + std-SPECT/CT and WB-BS + UF-SPECT/CT using the three-category scale: kappa = 0.91 (95% CI 0.84–0.97). No difference in observer agreement between cancer types was detected. SPECT/CT provided a definitive classification in 90 of 104 cases in which WB-BS was not entirely diagnostic.ConclusionsTo investigate potential bone metastases, UF-SPECT/CT can be conducted as add-on to WB-BS to notably reduce the SPECT acquisition time without compromising diagnostic confidence.

Widespread central hypersensitivity is present in chronic pain and contributes to pain and disability. According to animal studies, expansion of receptive fields of spinal cord neurons is involved in central hypersensitivity. We recently developed a method to quantify nociceptive receptive fields in humans using spinal withdrawal reflexes. Here we hypothesized that patients with chronic pelvic pain display enlarged reflex receptive fields. Secondary endpoints were subjective pain thresholds and nociceptive withdrawal reflex thresholds after single and repeated (temporal summation) electrical stimulation. 20 patients and 25 pain-free subjects were tested. Electrical stimuli were applied to 10 sites on the foot sole for evoking reflexes in the tibialis anterior muscle. The reflex receptive field was defined as the area of the foot (fraction of the foot sole) from which a muscle contraction was evoked. For the secondary endpoints, the stimuli were applied to the cutaneous innervation area of the sural nerve. Medians (25-75 percentiles) of fraction of the foot sole in patients and controls were 0.48 (0.38-0.54) and 0.33 (0.27-0.39), respectively (P=0.008). Pain and reflex thresholds after sural nerve stimulation were significantly lower in patients than in controls (P<0.001 for all measurements). This study provides for the first time evidence for widespread expansion of reflex receptive fields in chronic pain patients. It thereby identifies a mechanism involved in central hypersensitivity in human chronic pain. Reverting the expansion of nociceptive receptive fields and exploring the prognostic meaning of this phenomenon may become future targets of clinical research.

Recent studies have shown that the nociceptive withdrawal reflex threshold (NWR-T) and the electrical pain threshold (EP-T) are reliable measures in pain-free populations. However, it is necessary to investigate the reliability of these measures in patients with chronic pain in order to translate these techniques from laboratory to clinic. The aims of this study were to determine the test-retest reliability of the NWR-T and EP-T after single and repeated (temporal summation) electrical stimulation in a group of patients with chronic low back pain, and to investigate the association between the NWR-T and the EP-T. To this end, 25 patients with chronic pain participated in three identical sessions, separated by 1 week in average, in which the NWR-T and the EP-T to single and repeated stimulation were measured. Test-retest reliability was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), and Bland-Altman analysis. The association between the thresholds was assessed using the coefficient of determination (r (2)). The results showed good-to-excellent reliability for both NWR-T and EP-T in all cases, with average ICC values ranging 0.76-0.90 and average CV values ranging 12.0-17.7%. The association between thresholds was better after repeated stimulation than after single stimulation, with average r (2) values of 0.83 and 0.56, respectively. In conclusion, the NWR-T and the EP-T are reliable assessment tools for assessing the sensitivity of spinal nociceptive pathways in patients with chronic pain.

Most QST measurements have acceptable reliability in patients with chronic low back pain.

Long-term potentiation (LTP) is a cellular model of synaptic plasticity and reflects an increase of synaptic strength. LTP is also present in the nociceptive system and is believed to be one of the key mechanisms involved in the manifestations of chronic pain. LTP manifested as an increased response in pain perception can be induced in humans using high-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS). The aim of this study was to induce spinal heterosynaptic LTP using HFS and investigate its heterotopic effects on event-related potentials (ERPs) to repeated nonpainful cutaneous stimuli as a possible electrophysiological cortical correlate of sensitization. Twenty-two healthy subjects were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental conditions: HFS and control stimulation. Before and after the stimulation, both conditions received heterotopic mechanical (pinprick) and paired nonpainful electrical test stimuli to quantify and confirm the effects of HFS on the behavioral level. ERPs to paired nonpainful electrical stimulation were measured simultaneously. Conditioning HFS resulted in significant heterotopic effects after 30 min, including increased perceived intensity in response to (pinprick) mechanical and paired nonpainful electrical stimulation compared with control. The paired nonpainful electrical stimuli were accompanied by significantly enhanced responses regarding the ERP N1-P2 peak-to-peak and P300 amplitude compared with control. These findings suggest that HFS is capable of producing heterosynaptic spinal LTP that can be measured not only behaviorally but also using ERPs.

The use of Bayes factors is becoming increasingly common in psychological sciences. Thus, it is important that researchers understand the logic behind the Bayes factor in order to correctly interpret it, and the strengths of weaknesses of the Bayesian approach. As education for psychological scientists focuses on frequentist statistics, resources are needed for researchers and students who want to learn more about this alternative approach. The aim of the current article is to provide such an overview to a psychological researcher. We cover the general logic behind Bayesian statistics, explain how the Bayes factor is calculated, how to set the priors in popular software packages to reflect the prior beliefs of the researcher, and finally provide a set of recommendations and caveats for interpreting Bayes factors. the Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF VRG13-007).

No abstract