Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation produces variable changes in somatosensory evoked potentials, sensory perception and pain threshold: clinical implications for pain relief.

Golding, J.F.; Ashton, Heather; Marsh, Roger R.; Thompson, John W.

doi:10.1136/jnnp.49.12.1397

Cited by 33 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is good evidence that the N 9 component of the SEP represents conduction of the potential along the peripheral nerve, N 13 in the cervical dorsal horn and P 14 -N 20 in the cervicomedullary junction near the cuneate nucleus [7]–[9], [32]–[34]. The N 20 -P 25 component represents arrival of the afferent volley in S1 and the P 25 -N 33 is thought to represent processing of the afferent volley in S1 [7]–[9], [32]–[34].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In relation to S1, the amplitude of short-latency components of the somatosensory evoked potential (SEP), thought to be related to cortical processing in S1 (e.g. N 20 -P 25 -N 33 ), is decreased in response to high frequency PES (100–200 Hz) at intensities ranging from below motor threshold to that sufficient to induce a muscle twitch [7]–[9]. The amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from TMS applied to M1 are decreased following PES at similar frequencies (100 Hz), but with weaker stimulation intensity [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Primary Sensory and Motor Cortex Excitability Are Co-Modulated in Response to Peripheral Electrical Nerve Stimulation

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peripheral electrical stimulation (PES) is a common clinical technique known to induce changes in corticomotor excitability; PES applied to induce a tetanic motor contraction increases, and PES at sub-motor threshold (sensory) intensities decreases, corticomotor excitability. Understanding of the mechanisms underlying these opposite changes in corticomotor excitability remains elusive. Modulation of primary sensory cortex (S1) excitability could underlie altered corticomotor excitability with PES. Here we examined whether changes in primary sensory (S1) and motor (M1) cortex excitability follow the same time-course when PES is applied using identical stimulus parameters. Corticomotor excitability was measured using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and sensory cortex excitability using somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) before and after 30 min of PES to right abductor pollicis brevis (APB). Two PES paradigms were tested in separate sessions; PES sufficient to induce a tetanic motor contraction (30–50 Hz; strong motor intensity) and PES at sub motor-threshold intensity (100 Hz). PES applied to induce strong activation of APB increased the size of the N20-P25 component, thought to reflect sensory processing at cortical level, and increased corticomotor excitability. PES at sensory intensity decreased the size of the P25-N33 component and reduced corticomotor excitability. A positive correlation was observed between the changes in amplitude of the cortical SEP components and corticomotor excitability following sensory and motor PES. Sensory PES also increased the sub-cortical P14-N20 SEP component. These findings provide evidence that PES results in co-modulation of S1 and M1 excitability, possibly due to cortico-cortical projections between S1 and M1. This mechanism may underpin changes in corticomotor excitability in response to afferent input generated by PES.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary Sensory and Motor Cortex Excitability Are Co-Modulated in Response to Peripheral Electrical Nerve Stimulation

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One major reason for the paucity of literature on this subject is possibly the lack of selectivity for nociceptive stimuli, which makes the evaluation of the interaction between large and small afferents more difficult to interpret. Indeed, intraneural stimulation (Bini et al, 1984), electrical stimulation of peripheral nerves (Ashton et al, 1984;Golding et al, 1986;Nardone and Schieppati, 1989), and contact heat stimulation (Marchand et al, 1991) have been widely used. All these methods are known to activate simultaneously the whole spectrum of peripheral afferent nerve fibers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulation of perception and neurophysiological correlates of brief CO₂laser stimuli in humans using concurrent large fiber stimulation

Nahra

Plaghki

2003

Somatosensory & Motor Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been postulated that peripheral large fiber stimulation could modulate pain perception, probably by gating the input from AS-and C-fibers. The present study examined the effects of concurrent large fiber stimulation on the perception and neurophysiological correlates of brief CO2 laser stimuli known to activate A- and C-nociceptor endings selectively. Four test stimuli of brief non-painful and painful CO2 laser pulses (duration 50 ms; diameter 5 mm; intensity range 0.116-0.212J) were delivered at random every 5-10s on the dorsum of the left forearm of ten healthy subjects. Large fiber stimulation was performed by a dynamic soft brush applied either adjacently to test stimuli (segmental brush condition) or on the dorsum of the contra-lateral foot (extrasegmental brush condition). Perception, reaction time (RT) and laser-evoked potentials (EPs) were examined for conditions with brush and without brush (control condition). The signal detection theory (SDT) was used to evaluate the discrimination performance and the decision criterion. During extrasegmental brushing, these variables were unaffected as compared with control conditions. During segmental brushing, the absolute detection threshold increased, the probability of detection decreased and the RT increased. Interestingly, the stimulus-response curve of detected stimuli and late LTPs did not change significantly. SDT analysis showed that segmental brushing did not change the discrimination performance or sensitivity but increased significantly the subject's decision criterion for reporting sensation. It was concluded that segmental brushing acted primarily at supra-spinal levels and not by gating the input from small primary afferents activated selectively by brief CO2 laser stimuli.

show abstract

“…Stimuli consisted of a series of 30 tones (1000 Hz, 60 dB, 200 ms) administered through headphones at randomly varied intervals of 8-12 s. Peaks N1 and P2 were identified and the mean N1 P2 amplitude measured in ,uV. In addition the Root Mean Square [22][23][24] Leeds Sleep Questionnaire A modified version of the questionnaire [18] was used. In addition to the standard questionnaire three further visual analogue scales were added with axes of more/less dreaming, more/less vivid dreams and more/less pleasant dreams.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do cholesterol‐lowering agents affect brain activity? A comparison of simvastatin, pravastatin, and placebo in healthy volunteers.

Harrison

Ashton

1994

Brit J Clinical Pharma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation produces variable changes in somatosensory evoked potentials, sensory perception and pain threshold: clinical implications for pain relief.

Cited by 33 publications

References 28 publications

Primary Sensory and Motor Cortex Excitability Are Co-Modulated in Response to Peripheral Electrical Nerve Stimulation

Primary Sensory and Motor Cortex Excitability Are Co-Modulated in Response to Peripheral Electrical Nerve Stimulation

Modulation of perception and neurophysiological correlates of brief CO₂laser stimuli in humans using concurrent large fiber stimulation

Do cholesterol‐lowering agents affect brain activity? A comparison of simvastatin, pravastatin, and placebo in healthy volunteers.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation produces variable changes in somatosensory evoked potentials, sensory perception and pain threshold: clinical implications for pain relief.

Cited by 33 publications

References 28 publications

Primary Sensory and Motor Cortex Excitability Are Co-Modulated in Response to Peripheral Electrical Nerve Stimulation

Primary Sensory and Motor Cortex Excitability Are Co-Modulated in Response to Peripheral Electrical Nerve Stimulation

Modulation of perception and neurophysiological correlates of brief CO2laser stimuli in humans using concurrent large fiber stimulation

Do cholesterol‐lowering agents affect brain activity? A comparison of simvastatin, pravastatin, and placebo in healthy volunteers.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Modulation of perception and neurophysiological correlates of brief CO₂laser stimuli in humans using concurrent large fiber stimulation