Suppr超能文献

听觉惊吓刺激可抑制疼痛,但不改变对腓肠神经刺激的伤害性屈曲反射。

Acoustic startle stimuli inhibit pain but do not alter nociceptive flexion reflexes to sural nerve stimulation.

作者信息

English Amber, Drummond Peter D

机构信息

Discipline of Psychology, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia.

出版信息

Psychophysiology. 2021 Apr;58(4):e13757. doi: 10.1111/psyp.13757. Epub 2021 Jan 14.

Abstract

Acoustic startle stimuli inhibit pain, but whether this is due to a cross-modal inhibitory process or some other mechanism is uncertain. To investigate this, electrical stimulation of the sural nerve either preceded or followed an acoustic startle stimulus (by 200 ms) or was presented alone in 30 healthy participants. Five electrical stimuli, five acoustic startle stimuli, 10 startle + electrical stimuli, and 10 electrical + startle stimuli were presented in mixed order at intervals of 30-60 s. Effects of the startle stimulus on pain ratings, pupillary dilatation and nociceptive flexion reflexes to the electric shock were assessed. The acoustic startle stimulus inhibited electrically evoked pain to the ensuing electric shock (p < .001), and the electrical stimulus inhibited the perceived loudness of a subsequent acoustic startle stimulus (p < .05). However, the startle stimulus did not affect electrically evoked pain when presented 200 ms after the electric shock, and electrically evoked pain did not influence the perceived loudness of a prior startle stimulus. Furthermore, stimulus order did not influence the pupillary responses or nociceptive flexion reflexes. These findings suggest that acoustic startle stimuli transiently inhibit nociceptive processing and, conversely, that electrical stimuli inhibit subsequent auditory processing. These inhibitory effects do not seem to involve spinal gating as nociceptive flexion reflexes to the electric shock were unaffected by stimulus order. Thus, cross-modal interactions at convergence points in the brainstem or higher centers may inhibit responses to the second stimulus in a two-stimulus train.

摘要

听觉惊吓刺激可抑制疼痛,但这是由于跨模态抑制过程还是其他机制尚不确定。为了对此进行研究,在30名健康参与者中,对腓肠神经进行电刺激,要么在听觉惊吓刺激之前(提前200毫秒),要么在其后,要么单独呈现。以30 - 60秒的间隔,将五种电刺激、五种听觉惊吓刺激、10次惊吓 + 电刺激和10次电刺激 + 惊吓刺激以混合顺序呈现。评估惊吓刺激对疼痛评分、瞳孔扩张以及对电击的伤害性屈曲反射的影响。听觉惊吓刺激抑制了随后电击诱发的疼痛(p < 0.001),而电刺激抑制了随后听觉惊吓刺激的感知响度(p < 0.05)。然而,当惊吓刺激在电击后200毫秒呈现时,它并未影响电击诱发的疼痛,并且电击诱发的疼痛也未影响先前惊吓刺激的感知响度。此外,刺激顺序并未影响瞳孔反应或伤害性屈曲反射。这些发现表明,听觉惊吓刺激可短暂抑制伤害性处理,反之,电刺激可抑制随后的听觉处理。这些抑制作用似乎不涉及脊髓闸门机制,因为对电击的伤害性屈曲反射不受刺激顺序的影响。因此,脑干或更高中枢汇聚点处的跨模态相互作用可能会抑制对双刺激序列中第二个刺激的反应。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验