2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2014.06.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pain in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review of neuroimaging studies

Abstract: IntroductionWhile pain in multiple sclerosis (MS) is common, in many cases the precise mechanisms are unclear. Neuroimaging studies could have a valuable role in investigating the aetiology of pain syndromes. The aim of this review was to synthesise and appraise the current literature on neuroimaging studies of pain syndromes in MS.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed and Scopus from their inception dates to the 2nd of April 2013. Studies were selected by predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Method… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
31
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, we formulated a quality assessment list adapted from the list used in a systematic review on neuroimaging studies in patients with multiple sclerosis (14). Sixteen items were defined: clear study objective, inclusion/ exclusion criteria, population demographics, diagnostic criteria and/or remission criteria, estimation of disease duration, composition of patient group (i.e., heterogeneous or homogenous regarding to origin of CS (pituitaryadrenal) and disease status (active-remission)), sample size, design (retrospective assessment based on scans obtained from routine pituitary evaluation, or prospective or crosssectional), inclusion of a control group assessed in the same manner as the patient group, assessment of cognitive and psychological functioning, imaging protocol, scanner type (1T, 1.5T or 3T), strength of effect reported, multivariate analysis, and discussion of limitations.…”
Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, we formulated a quality assessment list adapted from the list used in a systematic review on neuroimaging studies in patients with multiple sclerosis (14). Sixteen items were defined: clear study objective, inclusion/ exclusion criteria, population demographics, diagnostic criteria and/or remission criteria, estimation of disease duration, composition of patient group (i.e., heterogeneous or homogenous regarding to origin of CS (pituitaryadrenal) and disease status (active-remission)), sample size, design (retrospective assessment based on scans obtained from routine pituitary evaluation, or prospective or crosssectional), inclusion of a control group assessed in the same manner as the patient group, assessment of cognitive and psychological functioning, imaging protocol, scanner type (1T, 1.5T or 3T), strength of effect reported, multivariate analysis, and discussion of limitations.…”
Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is the first case in the literature of an isolated diffuse painful relapse related to a single demyelinating lesion in the right opercular region (Seixas et al, ). Although the lesion was extended to the juxta cortical white matter of both planum temporale and parietal operculum, it is unlikely that the part of the lesion extending to the planum temporale could be responsible for the symptoms.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…MRI findings in MS patients with headache and head pain have been described in a systematic review by Seixas et al The most significant findings were the association of trigeminal neuralgia with trigeminal nerve lesions in the brainstem, and migraine with lesions in the midbrain, red nucleus, substantia nigra, and periaqueductual gray matter . In the case reports of patients with CH and MS, while multiple supratentorial lesions were present, 2 patients showed brachium pontis lesions ipsilateral to the CH attacks, and a third patient with CH and MS had a lesion in the superior cerebellar peduncle ipsilateral to the headache attacks .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%