Department of Health Science and Technology, Center for Neuroplasticity and Pain (CNAP), SMI, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Pain Research Group/Pain Center, University Hospital Odense, Odense, Denmark.
Pain. 2020 Mar;161(3):464-475. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001737.
Altered pronociceptive and antinociceptive mechanisms are often implicated in painful conditions and have been increasingly studied over the past decade. For some painful conditions, alterations are well-established, but in populations with low back pain (LBP), there remains considerable debate whether these mechanisms are altered. The present systematic review aimed to address this issue by identifying studies assessing conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and/or temporal summation of pain (TSP) in patients with LBP, comparing with either a healthy control group or using a method with reference data available. Qualitative synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis of group differences were performed. For CPM and TSP, 20 and 29 original articles were eligible, with data for meta-analysis obtainable from 18 (1500 patients and 505 controls) and 27 (1507 patients and 1127 controls) studies, respectively. Most studies were of poor-to-fair quality with significant heterogeneity in study size, population, assessment methodology, and outcome. Nonetheless, CPM was impaired in patients with LBP compared with controls (standardized mean difference = -0.44 [-0.64 to -0.23], P < 0.001), and the magnitude of this impairment was related to pain chronicity (acute/recurrent vs chronic, P = 0.003), duration (RS = -0.62, P = 0.006), and severity (RS = -0.54, P = 0.02). Temporal summation of pain was facilitated in patients with LBP compared with controls (standardized mean difference = 0.50 [0.29-0.72], P < 0.001), and the magnitude of this facilitation was weakly related to pain severity (RS= 0.41, P = 0.04) and appeared to be influenced by test modality (P < 0.001). Impaired CPM and facilitated TSP were present in patients with LBP compared with controls, although the magnitude of differences was small which may direct future research on the clinical utility.
疼痛条件下的伤害感受和抗伤害感受机制常常发生改变,在过去十年中,这些机制受到了越来越多的研究。对于某些疼痛病症,这些改变已经得到了充分的证实,但对于腰痛(LBP)患者,这些机制是否发生改变仍存在很大争议。本系统综述旨在通过识别评估 LBP 患者条件性疼痛调制(CPM)和/或疼痛时间总和(TSP)的研究,解决这一问题,这些研究将与健康对照组进行比较,或使用具有参考数据的方法进行比较。对组间差异进行了定性综合和定量荟萃分析。对于 CPM 和 TSP,有 20 篇和 29 篇原始文章符合条件,可从 18 项(1500 名患者和 505 名对照者)和 27 项(1507 名患者和 1127 名对照者)研究中获得荟萃分析数据。大多数研究的质量较差到一般,研究规模、人群、评估方法和结果存在显著异质性。尽管如此,与对照组相比,LBP 患者的 CPM 受损(标准化均数差=-0.44[-0.64 至-0.23],P<0.001),且这种损伤程度与疼痛的慢性程度(急性/复发性与慢性,P=0.003)、持续时间(RS=-0.62,P=0.006)和严重程度(RS=-0.54,P=0.02)相关。与对照组相比,LBP 患者的疼痛时间总和增加(标准化均数差=0.50[0.29-0.72],P<0.001),且这种增加程度与疼痛严重程度呈弱相关(RS=0.41,P=0.04),且似乎受测试方式的影响(P<0.001)。与对照组相比,LBP 患者的 CPM 受损和 TSP 增加,尽管差异的幅度较小,但这可能为未来关于临床实用性的研究提供指导。