Keay Kevin A, Bandler Richard
Department of Anatomy and Histology and Pain Management and Research Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, The University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia.
Exp Physiol. 2002 Mar;87(2):275-9. doi: 10.1113/eph8702355.
It is well established clinically that the affective response to pain of deep origin (muscles, joints and viscera) is distinct from that evoked by cutaneous pain. Cutaneous pain triggers a fight-flight reaction (active emotional coping), whereas deep pain evokes a reaction of quiescence, decreased vigilance and vasodepression (passive emotional coping). These observations led to suggestions of distinct central representations for deep versus cutaneous pain. Indeed, studies using immediate early gene (c-fos) expression revealed selective activation of ventrolateral versus lateral columns of the midbrain periaqueductal grey region (PAG) by persistent pain of deep origin versus intermittent cutaneous pain. Ventrolateral versus lateral PAG activation had been found earlier to evoke passive versus active emotional coping. However, not all cutaneous pain triggers active coping. Persistent cutaneous pain (e.g. burns) instead, usually evokes passive coping. This raised the question of whether the behavioural significance of pain (i.e. its escapability versus inescapability), rather than its tissue origin, is represented in supraspinal regions such as the PAG. Subsequent study revealed that a persistent (inescapable) noxious cutaneous manipulation (clip of the neck) evoked both selective ventrolateral PAG Fos expression and passive emotional coping. Such data suggest that pain representation in the PAG reflects a quality akin to behavioural significance, rather than tissue origin. In contrast, in the spinal cord predominantly superficial dorsal horn Fos expression was seen after either persistent or intermittent noxious cutaneous stimuli, leaving the question of the pathway(s) via which persistent (inescapable) cutaneous pain activates the vlPAG unanswered. One experimental approach to this question is suggested.
临床上已充分证实,对深部来源(肌肉、关节和内脏)疼痛的情感反应与皮肤疼痛所引发的反应截然不同。皮肤疼痛引发“战斗或逃跑”反应(积极的情绪应对),而深部疼痛则引发安静、警觉性降低和血管抑制的反应(消极的情绪应对)。这些观察结果提示,深部疼痛与皮肤疼痛在中枢有不同的表征。事实上,利用即刻早期基因(c-fos)表达进行的研究表明,深部持续性疼痛与间歇性皮肤疼痛分别选择性激活中脑导水管周围灰质区域(PAG)腹外侧柱和外侧柱。此前已发现,腹外侧与外侧PAG激活分别引发消极与积极的情绪应对。然而,并非所有皮肤疼痛都会引发积极应对。相反,持续性皮肤疼痛(如烧伤)通常会引发消极应对。这就提出了一个问题,即疼痛的行为意义(即其可逃避性与不可逃避性)而非其组织来源,是否在诸如PAG等脊髓上区域有所体现。随后的研究表明,持续性(不可逃避的)有害皮肤刺激(夹颈部)既引发了腹外侧PAG的Fos选择性表达,也引发了消极情绪应对。这些数据表明,PAG中的疼痛表征反映的是一种类似于行为意义的性质,而非组织来源。相比之下,无论是持续性还是间歇性有害皮肤刺激后,脊髓背角浅层均主要出现Fos表达,因此持续性(不可逃避的)皮肤疼痛激活腹外侧导水管周围灰质(vlPAG)的途径问题仍未得到解答。本文提出了一种针对该问题进行实验的方法。