Cargando…

An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials

Previous studies comparing laser (LEPs) and contact heat evoked potentials (CHEPs) consistently reported higher amplitudes following laser compared to contact heat stimulation. However, none of the studies matched the perceived pain intensity, questioning if the observed difference in amplitude is d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Schoenmacker, Iara, Berry, Carson, Blouin, Jean-Sébastien, Rosner, Jan, Hubli, Michèle, Jutzeler, Catherine R., Kramer, John L. K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7994633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33767259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85819-w
_version_ 1783669793794031616
author De Schoenmacker, Iara
Berry, Carson
Blouin, Jean-Sébastien
Rosner, Jan
Hubli, Michèle
Jutzeler, Catherine R.
Kramer, John L. K.
author_facet De Schoenmacker, Iara
Berry, Carson
Blouin, Jean-Sébastien
Rosner, Jan
Hubli, Michèle
Jutzeler, Catherine R.
Kramer, John L. K.
author_sort De Schoenmacker, Iara
collection PubMed
description Previous studies comparing laser (LEPs) and contact heat evoked potentials (CHEPs) consistently reported higher amplitudes following laser compared to contact heat stimulation. However, none of the studies matched the perceived pain intensity, questioning if the observed difference in amplitude is due to biophysical differences between the two methods or a mismatch in stimulation intensity. The aims of the current study were twofold: (1) to directly compare the brain potentials induced by intensity matched laser and contact heat stimulation and (2) investigate how capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia modulates LEPs and CHEPs. Twenty-one healthy subjects were recruited and measured at four experimental sessions: (1) CHEPs + sham, (2) LEPs + sham, (3) CHEPs + capsaicin, and (4) LEPs + capsaicin. Baseline (sham) LEPs latency was significantly shorter and amplitude significantly larger compared to CHEPs, even when matched for perceived pain. Neither CHEPs nor LEPs was sensitive enough to detect secondary hyperalgesia. These differences provide evidence that a faster heating rate results in an earlier and more synchronized LEPs than CHEPs. To our knowledge, this was the first study to match perceived intensity of contact heat and laser stimulations, revealing distinct advantages associated with the acquisition of LEPs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7994633
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79946332021-03-29 An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials De Schoenmacker, Iara Berry, Carson Blouin, Jean-Sébastien Rosner, Jan Hubli, Michèle Jutzeler, Catherine R. Kramer, John L. K. Sci Rep Article Previous studies comparing laser (LEPs) and contact heat evoked potentials (CHEPs) consistently reported higher amplitudes following laser compared to contact heat stimulation. However, none of the studies matched the perceived pain intensity, questioning if the observed difference in amplitude is due to biophysical differences between the two methods or a mismatch in stimulation intensity. The aims of the current study were twofold: (1) to directly compare the brain potentials induced by intensity matched laser and contact heat stimulation and (2) investigate how capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia modulates LEPs and CHEPs. Twenty-one healthy subjects were recruited and measured at four experimental sessions: (1) CHEPs + sham, (2) LEPs + sham, (3) CHEPs + capsaicin, and (4) LEPs + capsaicin. Baseline (sham) LEPs latency was significantly shorter and amplitude significantly larger compared to CHEPs, even when matched for perceived pain. Neither CHEPs nor LEPs was sensitive enough to detect secondary hyperalgesia. These differences provide evidence that a faster heating rate results in an earlier and more synchronized LEPs than CHEPs. To our knowledge, this was the first study to match perceived intensity of contact heat and laser stimulations, revealing distinct advantages associated with the acquisition of LEPs. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-03-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7994633/ /pubmed/33767259 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85819-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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/.
spellingShingle Article
De Schoenmacker, Iara
Berry, Carson
Blouin, Jean-Sébastien
Rosner, Jan
Hubli, Michèle
Jutzeler, Catherine R.
Kramer, John L. K.
An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials
title An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials
title_full An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials
title_fullStr An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials
title_full_unstemmed An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials
title_short An intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials
title_sort intensity matched comparison of laser- and contact heat evoked potentials
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7994633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33767259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85819-w
work_keys_str_mv AT deschoenmackeriara anintensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT berrycarson anintensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT blouinjeansebastien anintensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT rosnerjan anintensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT hublimichele anintensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT jutzelercatheriner anintensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT kramerjohnlk anintensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT deschoenmackeriara intensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT berrycarson intensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT blouinjeansebastien intensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT rosnerjan intensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT hublimichele intensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT jutzelercatheriner intensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials
AT kramerjohnlk intensitymatchedcomparisonoflaserandcontactheatevokedpotentials