Marchand Serge, Kupers Ron C, Bushnell Catherine M, Duncan Gary H
Faculté de Médecine, Neurochirurgie, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001 12e Avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada J1H 5N4 Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Abitibi-Témiscamingue, QC, Canada Centre de Recherche en Sciences Neurologiques, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada Department of Anesthesia, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada Center for Functionally Integrative Neuroscience (CFIN), Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Pain. 2003 Oct;105(3):481-488. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(03)00265-3.
Numerous clinical studies have reported successful relief of chronic pain with sensory thalamic stimulation. However, even with the extensive use of sensory thalamic stimulation as a clinical tool in the relief of chronic pain, the results are still inconsistent. This discrepancy could probably be explained by the fact that the majority of these studies are case reports or retrospective analyses, which have often used imprecise pain measurements that do not allow a rigorous statistical evaluation of pain relief. None of these studies measured the effect of stimulation on clinical pain for longer than a few hours per day, which is an important aspect considering that clinical pain can vary over time. Moreover, placebo controls are seldom included. In the current study, we measured patients' pain perception at home over a 2-week period, both during days of normal stimulation of the sensory thalamus and during days without stimulation. Patients also came to the laboratory to assess the effects of thalamic and placebo stimulation on clinical pain, experimental heat pain, innocuous air puff and visual stimulation. A potential relation between the perceived paresthesia and analgesic efficacy during thalamic and placebo stimulation was also explored. We found that thalamic stimulation significantly affected clinical and experimental pain perception, but that an important placebo component also exists. On the other hand, neither thalamic nor placebo stimulation affected air puff and visual ratings, suggesting that the effect applies specifically to pain and hence is not caused by a general change in attention. The level of paresthesia elicited during the placebo manipulation was also directly correlated with the degree of placebo pain relief. These results suggest that thalamic stimulation produces a small but significant reduction in pain perception, but that a significant placebo effect also exists.
许多临床研究报告称,感觉丘脑刺激可成功缓解慢性疼痛。然而,尽管感觉丘脑刺激作为缓解慢性疼痛的临床工具被广泛应用,但其结果仍不一致。这种差异可能是由于这些研究大多是病例报告或回顾性分析,往往使用不精确的疼痛测量方法,无法对疼痛缓解进行严格的统计学评估。这些研究中没有一项测量刺激对临床疼痛的影响超过每天几小时,而考虑到临床疼痛会随时间变化,这是一个重要方面。此外,很少纳入安慰剂对照。在本研究中,我们在两周时间内测量了患者在家中的疼痛感知,包括感觉丘脑正常刺激日和无刺激日。患者还前往实验室评估丘脑刺激和安慰剂刺激对临床疼痛、实验性热痛、无害气 puff 和视觉刺激的影响。还探讨了丘脑刺激和安慰剂刺激期间感觉到的感觉异常与镇痛效果之间的潜在关系。我们发现丘脑刺激显著影响临床和实验性疼痛感知,但也存在重要的安慰剂成分。另一方面,丘脑刺激和安慰剂刺激均未影响气 puff 和视觉评分,这表明该效应专门适用于疼痛,因此不是由注意力的普遍变化引起的。安慰剂操作期间诱发的感觉异常水平也与安慰剂疼痛缓解程度直接相关。这些结果表明,丘脑刺激可使疼痛感知有小幅但显著的降低,但也存在显著的安慰剂效应。