Heterotopic CO₂Laser Stimulation Inhibits Tooth-Related Somatosensory Evoked Potentials

Abstract

The present study revealed that CO(2) laser radiation attenuated the late component of SEPs induced by electrical tooth stimulation, triggering the DNIC effect but with no aftereffect.

Evoked potentials after painful cutaneous electrical stimulation depict pain relief during a conditioned pain modulation

“…In our CPM-paradigm, the PCES-EP-amplitude significantly decreased during CS by 32 ± 11%, which was much more pronounced than CHEP-amplitudes [ 2 ] or SEP-amplitudes after chemonasal CO 2 -stimulation [ 22 ] as TS. Furthermore, the PCES-EP-amplitude is comparable to studies assessing SEP-amplitudes after CO 2 laser stimulation [ 17 ], and after electrical tooth stimulation [ 20 , 21 ].…”

“…Thus, the interpretation of differences in the effects of both techniques needs to be done with care. A study recording SEP after electrical tooth stimulation as TS and CO 2 -laser stimulation as CS have also found a significant CPM-effect for both pain intensity and EP-amplitudes, without presenting any data on their correlation [ 17 ].…”

“…Numerous paradigms with different TS and CS (pressure, heat, cold, ischemia, electricity, laser) have been introduced, with high variability in the magnitude of the CPM-effect across subjects and studies [ 13 ]. Several studies have evaluated the CPM-effect using electrophysiological findings to objectively quantify the CPM effect, based on the spinal nociceptive flexion reflex (changes of amplitude [ 14 ] or threshold [ 15 ]), the R2-response of the blink reflex [ 16 ], as well as on sensory evoked potentials (SEP) after CO 2 -laser stimulation [ 17 – 19 ], electrical tooth stimulation [ 20 , 21 ], contact-heat stimulation [ 2 ] and chemonasal CO 2 -stimulation [ 22 ]. All of them showed significant effects across the study populations, however, they report of variable effects on individual subject level, and not all studies reported the number of subjects in whom the CPM-effect was detectable [ 23 ].…”

Psychophysical and Electrophysiological Evidence for Enhanced Pain Facilitation and Unaltered Pain Inhibition in Acute Low Back Pain Patients

“…consistent amplitude reduction of the late ERP components 5,9,27,28,40,53,62,67,83,85 . In contrast, chronic pain patients generally did not display changes in the ERP amplitudes during CPM 1,13,63,78 , although there are some examples in which cortical changes have been observed 65 .…”

Cortical mapping of painful electrical stimulation by quantitative electroencephalography: unraveling the time–frequency–channel domain

“…In the second experiment, each participant received 20 electrical stimuli (250 Hz, train of five) at 1.4 times the intensity of the EPT, with a variable interstimulus interval of 8–12 seconds, in the region of the median nerve on the dominant hand. 24 , 25 The 20 stimuli were performed twice: once before (baseline condition) and once during the application of the conditioning stimulus (CPM condition). In order to apply the conditioning stimulus, patients had to insert their non-dominant hand in cold, distilled water (VersaCool; Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) of 12°C up to the wrist for 3 minutes.…”