Cargando…
Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects
It has already been described that transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) can selectively influence nociceptive evoked potentials. This study is the first aiming to prove an influence of tsDCS on pain-related evoked potentials (PREP) using concentric surface electrodes (CE), whose...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10684856/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38016967 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-47408-x |
_version_ | 1785151497895411712 |
---|---|
author | Eberhardt, Frederic Enax-Krumova, Elena Tegenthoff, Martin Höffken, Oliver Özgül, Özüm Simal |
author_facet | Eberhardt, Frederic Enax-Krumova, Elena Tegenthoff, Martin Höffken, Oliver Özgül, Özüm Simal |
author_sort | Eberhardt, Frederic |
collection | PubMed |
description | It has already been described that transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) can selectively influence nociceptive evoked potentials. This study is the first aiming to prove an influence of tsDCS on pain-related evoked potentials (PREP) using concentric surface electrodes (CE), whose nociceptive specificity is still under discussion. 28 healthy subjects participated in this sham-controlled, double-blind cross-over study. All subjects underwent one session of anodal and one session of sham low-thoracic tsDCS. Before and after the intervention, PREP using CE, PREP-induced pain perception and somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) were assessed on the right upper and lower limb. We found a decrease in PREP amplitude at the lower limb after sham stimulation, but not after anodal tsDCS, while SEP remained unchanged under all studied conditions. There was no difference between the effects of anodal tsDCS and sham stimulation on the studied parameters assessed at the upper limb. PREP-induced pain of the upper and lower limb increased after anodal tsDCS. The ability of influencing PREP using a CE at the spinal level in contrast to SEP suggests that PREP using CE follows the spinothalamic pathway and supports the assumption that it is specifically nociceptive. However, while mainly inhibitory effects on nociceptive stimuli have already been described, our results rather suggest that anodal tsDCS has a sensitizing effect. This may indicate that the mechanisms underlying the elicitation of PREP with CE are not the same as for the other nociceptive evoked potentials. The effects on the processing of different types of painful stimuli should be directly compared in future studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10684856 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106848562023-11-30 Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects Eberhardt, Frederic Enax-Krumova, Elena Tegenthoff, Martin Höffken, Oliver Özgül, Özüm Simal Sci Rep Article It has already been described that transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) can selectively influence nociceptive evoked potentials. This study is the first aiming to prove an influence of tsDCS on pain-related evoked potentials (PREP) using concentric surface electrodes (CE), whose nociceptive specificity is still under discussion. 28 healthy subjects participated in this sham-controlled, double-blind cross-over study. All subjects underwent one session of anodal and one session of sham low-thoracic tsDCS. Before and after the intervention, PREP using CE, PREP-induced pain perception and somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) were assessed on the right upper and lower limb. We found a decrease in PREP amplitude at the lower limb after sham stimulation, but not after anodal tsDCS, while SEP remained unchanged under all studied conditions. There was no difference between the effects of anodal tsDCS and sham stimulation on the studied parameters assessed at the upper limb. PREP-induced pain of the upper and lower limb increased after anodal tsDCS. The ability of influencing PREP using a CE at the spinal level in contrast to SEP suggests that PREP using CE follows the spinothalamic pathway and supports the assumption that it is specifically nociceptive. However, while mainly inhibitory effects on nociceptive stimuli have already been described, our results rather suggest that anodal tsDCS has a sensitizing effect. This may indicate that the mechanisms underlying the elicitation of PREP with CE are not the same as for the other nociceptive evoked potentials. The effects on the processing of different types of painful stimuli should be directly compared in future studies. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10684856/ /pubmed/38016967 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-47408-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Eberhardt, Frederic Enax-Krumova, Elena Tegenthoff, Martin Höffken, Oliver Özgül, Özüm Simal Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects |
title | Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects |
title_full | Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects |
title_fullStr | Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects |
title_full_unstemmed | Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects |
title_short | Anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects |
title_sort | anodal transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation influences the amplitude of pain-related evoked potentials in healthy subjects |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10684856/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38016967 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-47408-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT eberhardtfrederic anodaltranscutaneousspinaldirectcurrentstimulationinfluencestheamplitudeofpainrelatedevokedpotentialsinhealthysubjects AT enaxkrumovaelena anodaltranscutaneousspinaldirectcurrentstimulationinfluencestheamplitudeofpainrelatedevokedpotentialsinhealthysubjects AT tegenthoffmartin anodaltranscutaneousspinaldirectcurrentstimulationinfluencestheamplitudeofpainrelatedevokedpotentialsinhealthysubjects AT hoffkenoliver anodaltranscutaneousspinaldirectcurrentstimulationinfluencestheamplitudeofpainrelatedevokedpotentialsinhealthysubjects AT ozgulozumsimal anodaltranscutaneousspinaldirectcurrentstimulationinfluencestheamplitudeofpainrelatedevokedpotentialsinhealthysubjects |