Evoked cerebral responses to noxious thermal stimuli in humans

Carmon, Amiram; Mor, J.; Goldberg, Jay M.

doi:10.1007/bf00237330

Cited by 228 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such stimuli elicit a number of transient brain responses ( laser-evoked potentials, LEPs) in the ongoing electroencephalogram (EEG) (Carmon, Mor, & Goldberg, 1976). These responses are mediated by the activation of type II Aδ mechano-heat nociceptors (AMH) and spinothalamic neurons in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord (Treede, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because LEPs are elicited by stimuli entirely selective for nociceptive peripheral afferents, and because in most experimental conditions they correlate with the amount of perceived pain, LEPs are sometimes regarded as nociceptive-specific responses, and referred to as "pain-evoked potentials" (e.g., Edwards, Inui, Ring, Wang, & Kakigi, 2008;Schmidt et al, 2007;Kakigi, Watanabe, & Yamasaki, 2000). However, as already pointed out by Stowell (1984) and Carmon et al (1976) in their seminal work, LEPs could also reflect stimulus-triggered brain processes that are entirely unspecific for nociception. We recently investigated the functional significance of LEPs by recording the psychophysical and EEG responses elicited by short trains of three consecutive nociceptive stimuli of identical energy (S1-S2-S3, a triplet), delivered at a short (1 sec) and constant interstimulus interval (ISI) to the hand dorsum (Iannetti, Hughes, Lee, & Mouraux, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dishabituation of Laser-evoked EEG Responses: Dissecting the Effect of Certain and Uncertain Changes in Stimulus Modality

Valentini

Torta

Mouraux

et al. 2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ The repetition of nociceptive stimuli of identical modality, intensity, and location at short and constant interstimulus intervals (ISIs) determines a strong habituation of the corresponding EEG responses, without affecting the subjective perception of pain. To understand what determines this response habituation, we (i) examined the effect of introducing a change in the modality of the repeated stimulus, and (ii) dissected the relative contribution of bottom-up, stimulus-driven changes in modality and top-down, cognitive expectations of such a change, on both laser-evoked and auditory-evoked EEG responses. Multichannel EEG was recorded while participants received trains of three stimuli (S1-S2-S3, a triplet) delivered to the hand dorsum at 1-sec ISI. S3 belonged either to the same modality as S1 and S2 or to the other modality. In addition, participants were either explicitly informed or not informed of the modality of S3. We found that introducing a change in stimulus modality produced a significant dishabituation of the laser-evoked N1, N2, and P2 waves; the auditory N1 and P2 waves; and the laser-and auditory-induced event-related synchronization and desynchronization. In contrast, the lack of explicit knowledge of a possible change in the sensory modality of the stimulus (i.e., uncertainty) only increased the ascending portion of the laser-evoked and auditory-evoked P2 wave. Altogether, these results indicate that bottom-up novelty resulting from the change of stimulus modality, and not topdown cognitive expectations, plays a major role in determining the habituation of these brain responses. ■

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dishabituation of Laser-evoked EEG Responses: Dissecting the Effect of Certain and Uncertain Changes in Stimulus Modality

Valentini

Torta

Mouraux

et al. 2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such stimuli elicit a number of electrical brain responses, some of which can be detected in the human EEG (Carmon et al, 1976;Mouraux et al, 2003). Although the laser stimulus coactivates several distinct ascending somatosensory pathways (Iannetti et al, 2003), the detected responses have been shown to be exclusively related to the activation of type-II A␦ mechano-heat nociceptors (Treede et al, 1995) and spinothalamic neurons located in the anterolateral quadrant of the spinal cord (Treede, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterizing the Cortical Activity through Which Pain Emerges from Nociception

Lee¹,

Mouraux²,

Iannetti³

2009

Journal of Neuroscience

137

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nociception begins when A␦-and C-nociceptors are activated. However, the processing of nociceptive input by the cortex is required before pain can be consciously experienced from nociception. To characterize the cortical activity related to the emergence of this experience, we recorded, in humans, laser-evoked potentials elicited by physically identical nociceptive stimuli that were either perceived or unperceived. Infrared laser pulses, which selectively activate skin nociceptors, were delivered to the hand dorsum either as a pair of rapidly succeeding and spatially displaced stimuli (two-thirds of trials) or as a single stimulus (one-third of trials). After each trial, subjects reported whether one or two distinct painful pinprick sensations, associated with A␦-nociceptor activation, had been perceived. The psychophysical feedback after each pair of stimuli was used to adjust the interstimulus interval (ISI) of the subsequent pair: when a single percept was reported, ISI was increased by 40 ms; when two distinct percepts were reported, ISI was decreased by 40 ms. This adaptive algorithm ensured that the probability of perceiving the second stimulus of the pair tended toward 0.5. We found that the magnitude of the early-latency N1 wave was similar between perceived and unperceived stimuli, whereas the magnitudes of the later N2 and P2 waves were reduced when stimuli were unperceived. These findings suggest that the N1 wave represents an early stage of sensory processing related to the ascending nociceptive input, whereas the N2 and P2 waves represent a later stage of processing related, directly or indirectly, to the perceptual outcome of this nociceptive input.

show abstract

“…However, the contribution of these activities to all event-related brain potentials (ERPs), including those elicited by nociceptive stimuli, appears to depend greatly on the saliency of the elic-iting stimulus and/or its relevance for the ongoing cognitive task Legrain et al 2012). Therefore, the dominant contribution of these vertex responses to nociceptive SEPs could reflect mainly the engagement of nonobligatory and modality-unspecific processes that depend on the environmental and cognitive context within which the stimulus appears (e.g., factors determining stimulus saliency) (Carmon et al 1976;Davis 1939;Iannetti and Mouraux 2010;Stowell 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Unmasking the obligatory components of nociceptive event-related brain potentials

Mouraux

Paepe

Marot

et al. 2013

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-It has been hypothesized that the human cortical responses to nociceptive and nonnociceptive somatosensory inputs differ. Supporting this view, somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEPs) elicited by thermal nociceptive stimuli have been suggested to originate from areas 1 and 2 of the contralateral primary somatosensory (S1), operculo-insular, and cingulate cortices, whereas the early components of nonnociceptive SEPs mainly originate from area 3b of S1. However, to avoid producing a burn lesion, and sensitize or fatigue nociceptors, thermonociceptive SEPs are typically obtained by delivering a small number of stimuli with a large and variable interstimulus interval (ISI). In contrast, the early components of nonnociceptive SEPs are usually obtained by applying many stimuli at a rapid rate. Hence, previously reported differences between nociceptive and nonnociceptive SEPs could be due to differences in signal-to-noise ratio and/or differences in the contribution of cognitive processes related, for example, to arousal and attention. Here, using intraepidermal electrical stimulation to selectively activate A␦-nociceptors at a fast and constant 1-s ISI, we found that the nociceptive SEPs obtained with a long ISI are no longer identified, indicating that these responses are not obligatory for nociception. Furthermore, using a blind source separation, we found that, unlike the obligatory components of nonnociceptive SEPs, the obligatory components of nociceptive SEPs do not receive a significant contribution from a contralateral source possibly originating from S1. Instead, they were best explained by sources compatible with bilateral operculo-insular and/or cingulate locations. Taken together, our results indicate that the obligatory components of nociceptive and nonnociceptive SEPs are fundamentally different.pain; nociception; event-related potentials; primary somatosensory cortex; laser-evoked potentials; intraepidermal stimulation FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS, a large number of studies have aimed at understanding the neural mechanisms underlying the processing of nociceptive input and the perception of pain in the human cortex. Most of these studies have relied on noninvasive techniques to sample brain activity, such as electroencephalography (EEG), magnetoencephalography (MEG), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and positron emission tomography (PET) (Bushnell and Apkarian 2005;Garcia-Larrea et al. 2003;Kakigi et al. 2005;Peyron et al. 2002;Treede et al. 1999). With these techniques, it has been shown repeatedly that nociceptive stimuli elicit responses in a wide array of brain areas, including postcentral, operculo-insular, and cingulate areas. A number of investigators have considered that the combined activation of these brain regions is responsible for the transformation of nociceptive input into a conscious perception of pain, in particular, the coding of pain intensity and pain unpleasantness (Boly et al.

show abstract

Evoked cerebral responses to noxious thermal stimuli in humans

Cited by 228 publications

References 5 publications

Dishabituation of Laser-evoked EEG Responses: Dissecting the Effect of Certain and Uncertain Changes in Stimulus Modality

Dishabituation of Laser-evoked EEG Responses: Dissecting the Effect of Certain and Uncertain Changes in Stimulus Modality

Characterizing the Cortical Activity through Which Pain Emerges from Nociception

Unmasking the obligatory components of nociceptive event-related brain potentials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About